On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:25:08 +0000, Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:58:03 +0100, Jesús Guerrero wrote: > >> @preserved-rebuild never worked for me, maybe it's just that it doesn't >> like ~arch. I am just too lazy to work on how to fix a thing when >> there's an alternative that always worked reliably, revdep-rebuild. > > If it didn't work on ~arch, how would it ever make it into arch? > I am not the one to answer that, all I can say is that the few times I've tried it, it kept rebuilding the same packages again, and again, and again ad infinitum, as said, I didn't even bother to find what the problem was, because I have a working alternative. Sure it could be better, but that hasn't been the case for me with @preserved-rebuild.
I've seen people reporting the same problems in the forums, so I am fairly sure that's a common problem and not just exclusive to my installations. > The trouble with revdep-rebuild is that you have to break your system and > then fix it. Most of the time this is trivial, but updates like expat-2.0 > showed the usefulness of being able to recompile the packages before they > were broken. I can't understand that. You CAN'T recompile your packages against the new ABI's until the new ABI is in your system, and hence your system is already broken. There's no preemptive measure against this. Both methods fix the system *after* it's broken. -- Jesús Guerrero
