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
-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
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
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
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.
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
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
7 matches
Mail list logo