| 1 |
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 14:43:33 +0100 |
| 2 |
Peter Humphrey <peter@××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Many thanks for that little bit of magic. I've incorporated it into a |
| 5 |
> simple script to find all the missed packages and list their atoms in |
| 6 |
> a form suitable for piping into emerge. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
You might not want to do that; those are _build_ dependencies, not |
| 9 |
_runtime_ dependencies. You don't need them for the package to run. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> I still think this is bad behaviour by portage. If portage's |
| 12 |
> environment is identical in the two cases and I tell it to emerge |
| 13 |
> -ek, the results should be identical to those if I tell it to emerge |
| 14 |
> -e. I know that -e means "empty- tree" but that sounds to me exactly |
| 15 |
> like "everything", so that's what I expect to get. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
It is correct behaviour; `emerge -ek` is similar to `emerge -e ; emerge |
| 18 |
-c --with-bdeps=n`, where the `emerge -c --with-bdeps=n` unmerges the |
| 19 |
build dependencies after the packages were build. As they are no longer |
| 20 |
needed after that part; that is, if you don't intend to rebuild them. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Thanks again to both of you - at least I can now be sure that I've |
| 23 |
> rebuilt everything when I think I have. I hate to think how many |
| 24 |
> things I've missed in the past. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
No problem; be happy to now know you don't need that what misses. :) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
With kind regards, |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
| 32 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
| 35 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
| 36 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |
Archives