| 1 |
2009/1/13 Paul Hartman |
| 2 |
<paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com<paul.hartman%2Bgentoo@×××××.com> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Chris Lieb <chris.lieb@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 7 |
> > Hash: SHA1 |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Nick Cunningham wrote: |
| 10 |
> >> |
| 11 |
> >> |
| 12 |
> >> 2009/1/13 Chris Lieb <chris.lieb@×××××.com <mailto:chris.lieb@×××××.com |
| 13 |
> >> |
| 14 |
> >> |
| 15 |
> >> I've noticed lately on the ML that people have been talking about |
| 16 |
> using |
| 17 |
> >> package sets, such as @world and @installed. I figured it was a |
| 18 |
> part of |
| 19 |
> >> portage 2.1.6* since using @world with 2.1.4* would result in an |
| 20 |
> error |
| 21 |
> >> message about an invalid package atom. However, after upgrading to |
| 22 |
> >> portage 2.1.6.4, I still get the same error when doing something |
| 23 |
> like |
| 24 |
> >> 'emerge -up @world'. |
| 25 |
> >> |
| 26 |
> >> What are these package sets? What is the difference between 'emerge |
| 27 |
> -up |
| 28 |
> >> world' and 'emerge -up @world'? Why don't these package sets ever |
| 29 |
> work |
| 30 |
> >> for me? |
| 31 |
> >> |
| 32 |
> >> Thanks, |
| 33 |
> >> Chris |
| 34 |
> >> |
| 35 |
> >> |
| 36 |
> >> A set is basically just group of packages, you can either define you own |
| 37 |
> >> using /etc/portage/ or using gentoo provided ones like @world and |
| 38 |
> >> @system (which will replace the current emerge system/world usage |
| 39 |
> >> eventually), aswell as useful sets such as @live-rebuild (any package |
| 40 |
> >> that uses a cvs/svn/git eclass, so basically any -9999 ebuild) and |
| 41 |
> >> @module-rebuild which is handy for rebuilding kernel modules. Also id |
| 42 |
> >> imagine meta-packages will eventually move over to sets as it makes |
| 43 |
> >> rebuilding everything or removing it much easier, currently theres only |
| 44 |
> >> kde4 that makes large usage of sets but id imagine once portage 2.20 |
| 45 |
> >> goes stable we'l see great set adoption. |
| 46 |
> >> An easy way to see what sets are available is to use the emerge |
| 47 |
> >> --list-sets command. |
| 48 |
> >> |
| 49 |
> >> -Nick |
| 50 |
> > |
| 51 |
> > Thanks for the info. The @module-rebuild should come in handy. Any |
| 52 |
> > idea on when we'll see 2.2* hit stable? |
| 53 |
> > |
| 54 |
> > Thanks again, |
| 55 |
> > Chris |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> "When it's ready" I guess is the standard answer there. :) it's masked |
| 58 |
> in ~arch as well, but you can simply unmask it if you want to use it. |
| 59 |
> That's what I did. I have these sets available in my system currently: |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> downgrade |
| 62 |
> installed |
| 63 |
> live-rebuild |
| 64 |
> module-rebuild |
| 65 |
> preserved-rebuild |
| 66 |
> security |
| 67 |
> system |
| 68 |
> unavailable |
| 69 |
> world |
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
> @live-rebuild is especially handy to rebuild live cvs/svn/etc ebuilds |
| 72 |
> (that -9999 stuff) |
| 73 |
> |
| 74 |
> Paul |
| 75 |
> |
| 76 |
> |
| 77 |
Same, here, ive been a happy user of portage 2.2 for a long time now and im |
| 78 |
very happy with it and loving the ability to use sets. As with all programs |
| 79 |
in ~ARCH (and especially as its also masked and under active development) |
| 80 |
there may be occassional bug or other random error, but if your comfortable |
| 81 |
working around them and/or reporting them then portage 2.2 is definately |
| 82 |
worth a try :) |
| 83 |
|
| 84 |
- Nick |
Archives