| 1 |
On Saturday 14 Mar 2015 23:03:26 James wrote: |
| 2 |
> Neil Bothwick <neil <at> digimed.co.uk> writes: |
| 3 |
> > > Today, I have many many ugly and hacked java projects |
| 4 |
> > > on my "munge" system. I have spend countless hours hacking |
| 5 |
> > > at java; so I do not wish for any dev-java codes to be removed |
| 6 |
> > > by --depclean, but the others can be cleaned up. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Why not simply create a set containing all the ebuilds you are |
| 9 |
> > experimenting with? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I'm not sure how to put everything dev-java into a set; so that |
| 12 |
> it will updated but not depclean out those packages. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Gotta quick example? It's been a while since I used sets in portage.... |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> James |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I don't use java, but assuming you know what packages you want to define |
| 20 |
separately for your java needs, have a look here for syntax: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//etc/portage/sets |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Regards, |
| 26 |
Mick |
Archives