Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread Marc Joliet
On Thursday 14 July 2016 14:43:54 Gevisz wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:52:41 +0200 Marc Joliet wrote: > > On Thursday 14 July 2016 08:17:19 Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > -N is newuse, portage also considers packages whose USE has changed. > > > -t is emptytree, portage also

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread Fernando Rodriguez
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 07/13/2016 05:41 PM, James wrote: > Alan McKinnon gmail.com> writes: > >> >> On 13/07/2016 20:25, James wrote: >>> So, today I ran a sync and upgrade to a gentoo workstation:: >>> emerge -uvDNp world >>> >>> These are the packages that

[gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread James
Franz Fellner gmail.com> writes: > > Sorry for the interrupting a big gurus, but in my humble opinion > > the reason why there was no compilation while running emerge for > > the first time is the -p option (pretend). > No, even without -p the first command wouldn't have done anything,

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread Franz Fellner
On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 14:43:54 +0300, Gevisz wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:52:41 +0200 Marc Joliet wrote: > > > On Thursday 14 July 2016 08:17:19 Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > -N is newuse, portage also considers packages whose USE has changed. > > > -t is

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread Gevisz
On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:52:41 +0200 Marc Joliet wrote: > On Thursday 14 July 2016 08:17:19 Alan McKinnon wrote: > > -N is newuse, portage also considers packages whose USE has changed. > > -t is emptytree, portage also considers the entire tree and -u tells it > > to not remerge

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread Marc Joliet
On Thursday 14 July 2016 08:17:19 Alan McKinnon wrote: > -N is newuse, portage also considers packages whose USE has changed. > -t is emptytree, portage also considers the entire tree and -u tells it > to not remerge things that don't need updating. Um, -e is --emptytree, no? -t is just --tree.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-14 Thread Alan McKinnon
On 14/07/2016 04:03, James wrote: >> It's unsurprising you got different behaviour > true, but the -u was in both and a complete different set of > packages was considered, by portage, and only one was able to > move forward (note the -p was not in the second entry, despite > my not including

[gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-13 Thread James
Alan McKinnon gmail.com> writes: > > Ah excellent point, but the build did not move forward with:: > > ' emerge -uvDN world' either. With the --tree it did move forward with > > the build update. In the first attempt usually the packages to be built > > are listed, conflicts or blockers. >

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-13 Thread Alan McKinnon
On 13/07/2016 23:41, James wrote: Alan McKinnon gmail.com> writes: On 13/07/2016 20:25, James wrote: So, today I ran a sync and upgrade to a gentoo workstation:: emerge -uvDNp world These are the packages that would be merged, in order: Calculating dependencies... done! Total: 0

[gentoo-user] Re: Portage getting slicker?

2016-07-13 Thread James
Alan McKinnon gmail.com> writes: > > On 13/07/2016 20:25, James wrote: > >> > > So, today I ran a sync and upgrade to a gentoo workstation:: > > emerge -uvDNp world > > > > These are the packages that would be merged, in order: > > Calculating dependencies... done! > > Total: 0 packages, Size