| 1 |
On Monday 03 October 2005 00:49, Dave Nebinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> > The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or |
| 3 |
> > deep) of your "world" list. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in |
| 6 |
> place as a result of a direct emerge. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
At some point, yes. Doesn't mean it is so now. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Eix and emerge both knew it was installed and that it needed to be updated |
| 11 |
> at the point when I was going to emerge eclipse. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> So I don't think that answer covers it... |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Is the eix database upto date? Are you really sure ant-core is actually |
| 16 |
installed? You said "it wanting to emerge ant-core", that suggests to me that |
| 17 |
ant-core isn't installed, unless you meant "it wanting to upgrade/update |
| 18 |
ant-core". |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > One way to verify is with "emerge -a |
| 21 |
> > depclean". If you want to keep any of the depclean packages then you |
| 22 |
> > should add some to /var/lib/portage/world. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> I haven't played with depclean so I'm going to have to look into that. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> So far I've taken the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" path in regards to |
| 27 |
> the portage subsystem. Up until this incident I didn't think it was broke. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Depcleans function is to clean, to remove packages that it believes are no |
| 30 |
longer needed, i.e. packages pulled in as dependencies to packages that have |
| 31 |
since been removed, or packages pulled is as compile time only dependencies. |
| 32 |
It's not a tool to "fix" anything. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Mike Williams |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives