Daniel Frey wrote:
> On 03/01/18 23:33, zlg wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:22:57PM -0600, Dale wrote:
>>> P. S. On the rare occasion I want to add something to the world file, I
>>> either do it directly or use --select y to override the -1 in
>>> make.conf. That helps keep the world file
On 03/01/18 23:33, zlg wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:22:57PM -0600, Dale wrote:
>>
>> P. S. On the rare occasion I want to add something to the world file, I
>> either do it directly or use --select y to override the -1 in
>> make.conf. That helps keep the world file from getting cluttered
On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 10:51:04 -0600, Dale wrote:
> > I recently took --oneshot out of EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS due to failing to
> > find --select y; now I can add it back in. Thanks for the tip!
> For a while, I had to remove it to add things to the world file, or add
> it directly. I don't know if
zlg wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:22:57PM -0600, Dale wrote:
>> Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>>> On 2018-02-27 11:02, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>>
A combination of --changed-deps, --with-bdeps=y and --deep is bound to
result in plenty of unnecessary re-emerging.
>>> So, what _is_ the
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 01:22:57PM -0600, Dale wrote:
> Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> > On 2018-02-27 11:02, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >
> >> A combination of --changed-deps, --with-bdeps=y and --deep is bound to
> >> result in plenty of unnecessary re-emerging.
> > So, what _is_ the recommended set of
On 02/27/2018 03:30 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
> --with-bdeps=n. Once a package is installed, it doesn't matter what
> happens to its build deps.
FWIW, the rationale for enabling bdeps by default for "upgrade" actions
is that the old build deps are already installed; so if there's a major
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 18:08:48 +0100, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> > A combination of --changed-deps, --with-bdeps=y and --deep is bound to
> > result in plenty of unnecessary re-emerging.
>
> Hi Neil,
>
> .andwhat do you suggest instead?
--with-bdeps=n. Once a package is installed, it
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2018-02-27 12:45, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> I use --with-bdeps=n because I really don't care that much about
>> build-time deps, other than stuff that is going to get updated anyway
>> like gcc. These packages don't
Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2018-02-27 11:02, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
>> A combination of --changed-deps, --with-bdeps=y and --deep is bound to
>> result in plenty of unnecessary re-emerging.
> So, what _is_ the recommended set of emerge flags for regular daily or
> weekly updates (assuming no binary
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 1:12 PM, Wols Lists wrote:
>
> If I emerge a new utility program (such as lame), I will change my
> global flags to tell other programs to use it. That is what
> --changed-deps is for - so the programs that were originally compiled
> without
On 27/02/18 17:43, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> The --changed-deps flag, on the other hand, is a crutch for when
> developers make in-place edits to ebuilds and don't make the necessary
> revision bump.
I believe the --changed-deps flag is ALSO for USERS who want to change
settings on their
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 02/27/2018 12:05 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>>
>> When I read this, I realize I don't understand the difference between
>> these two options. Or to be more accurate, I know that --deep means
>> looking at dependencies
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> On 2018-02-27 16:44, Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>
>> > > Yes, I use --deep. I've run into cases many times in the past
>> > > where portage was skipping updates unless I used --deep.
>> >
>> > You might want to avoid
On 02/27/2018 12:05 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
>
> When I read this, I realize I don't understand the difference between
> these two options. Or to be more accurate, I know that --deep means
> looking at dependencies beyond the first level; but isn't that just a
> superset of those found by
On 02/27 11:02, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:15:24 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>
> > >> luky you...I got 462 packages to recompile...
> > >
> > > Ooh! Bloat warning!
> >
> > It got even worse just today.
> >
> > Arch Linux is starting to look really, really tasty right
On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 12:15:24 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> >> luky you...I got 462 packages to recompile...
> >
> > Ooh! Bloat warning!
>
> It got even worse just today.
>
> Arch Linux is starting to look really, really tasty right about now...
A combination of --changed-deps,
On Tuesday, 27 February 2018 3:25:40 AM AEDT Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> > On 26/02/18 17:59, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >>> Can't you whitelist packages like automake so that they don't trigger
> >>> rebuilds? Or at least
Sorry...a typo...
It has to be 463 packages NOT 4563 packages...
Cheers
Meino
On 02/27 04:08, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> On 02/26 11:55, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Monday, 26 February 2018 18:42:33 GMT tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Peter,
> > >
> > > luky you...I got 462 packages to
On 02/26 11:55, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday, 26 February 2018 18:42:33 GMT tu...@posteo.de wrote:
>
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > luky you...I got 462 packages to recompile...
>
> Ooh! Bloat warning!
>
> --
> Regards,
> Peter.
>
>
And...after a nigth of compilation all that packages I synced
On Monday, 26 February 2018 18:42:33 GMT tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> luky you...I got 462 packages to recompile...
Ooh! Bloat warning!
--
Regards,
Peter.
On Monday, 26 February 2018 15:24:40 GMT Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 02/26/2018 10:16 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Well, I'm on amd64, not ~amd64, and this morning portage wanted to
> > remerge 217 packages. Removing --changed-deps reduced that to one:
> > sys-devel/llvm.
> You do need to
On 02/26 03:16, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday, 26 February 2018 14:52:25 GMT Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 09:46:00 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 2:36 AM, Nikos Chantziaras
> wrote:
> > >> I've been using --changed-deps when
On 02/26/2018 11:25 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> Of course, the real solution is revbumps whenever necessary, but
> getting devs to do that seems to be impossible, as everybody wants to
> assume that dynamic deps work.
>
We don't even need revbumps here. I'm sure there's a great historical
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 26/02/18 17:59, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> Can't you whitelist packages like automake so that they don't trigger
>>> rebuilds? Or at least provide a configurable whitelist (for make.conf)
>>> where
>>> we can add
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 26/02/18 17:24, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>>
>> On 02/26/2018 10:16 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, I'm on amd64, not ~amd64, and this morning portage wanted to
>>> remerge
>>> 217 packages. Removing
On 02/26/2018 10:16 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
> Well, I'm on amd64, not ~amd64, and this morning portage wanted to remerge
> 217 packages. Removing --changed-deps reduced that to one: sys-devel/llvm.
>
You do need to reinstall those.
The latest (un)stable versions of automake are hard-coded
On Monday, 26 February 2018 14:52:25 GMT Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2018 09:46:00 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 2:36 AM, Nikos Chantziaras
wrote:
> >> I've been using --changed-deps when doing a world upgrade ever since
> >> the
> >> news
27 matches
Mail list logo