| 1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 20:54 on Friday 19 November 2010, Allan |
| 2 |
Gottlieb did opine thusly: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > It seems, however, that you're still going down the path of emerge |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > -e @world. Why is that? If it's just to be confident that everything |
| 7 |
> > is back to the way it should be then I understand that. I've done it |
| 8 |
> > myself many times in the last 12 years. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Yes that is the reason. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Sounds like the big guns approach, can be valid at times. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm usually the first one to chip in about emerge -e world being stupid when |
| 16 |
someone reads the gcc upgrade guide, but sometimes you have a box that just |
| 17 |
will not fix itself despite hours of troubleshooting. In a case like this a |
| 18 |
full remerge often fixes mysterious but actual real problems. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives