Hey J.

I assume that's exactly what he wanted. Was just explaining what 'empty tree' 
would do for him...ask least what I think 'empty tree' will do for him.

On May 30, 2003 10:54 pm, Jesse Jacobs wrote:
> Hello Reg,
>
> Isn't that what's wanted?
>
> It avoids bootstrapping.
>
> j
>
> reg hughson said:
> > emerge -e world
> >
> > should re-emerge your entire system.
> >
> > On May 30, 2003 10:32 pm, Jesse Jacobs wrote:
> >> Hello Mike,
> >>
> >> Have u tried -e = empty tree?
> >>
> >> j
> >>
> >> Mike Bohan said:
> >> >  When run with world, it does in fact display many dependencies.
> >> > However, system only displays two.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > diesel root # emerge -up --deep system
> >> >
> >> > These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
> >> >
> >> > Calculating system dependencies ...done!
> >> > [ebuild    U ] dev-python/python-fchksum-1.6.1-r1 [1.6.1]
> >> > [ebuild    U ] sys-devel/gcc-config-1.3.3-r1 [1.3.1]
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 22:00, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> >> >> What does emerge -u --deep system (or world) -p give?
> >> >>
> >> >> > This is only somewhat related, but it sparked a question in my
> >>
> >> mind.
> >>
> >> >> How does one rebuild the entire system/world if all the packages
> >>
> >> are already up to date?
> >>
> >> >> > For example, my system reports...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > diesel root # emerge system
> >> >> > Calculating system dependencies ...done!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > >>> Auto-cleaning packages ...
> >> >> > >>>
> >> >> > >>> No outdated packages were found on your system.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  * GNU info directory index is up-to-date.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > If I upgrade to gcc 3.3, it'd make sense to rebuild the entire
> >> >>
> >> >> system. Is the only solution to rerun bootstrap.sh? If this is the
> >>
> >> case, is there a solution to rebuild all the world packages (even
> >> if they're up to date as well) without manually specifying them on
> >> the 'emerge line'? Thanks in advance!
> >>
> >> >> >                       -Mike Bohan
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Fri, 2003-05-30 at 18:56, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> >> >> > > On Friday 30 May 2003 22:53, Harald Arnesen wrote:
> >> >> > > > "Hemmann, Volker Armin"
> >>
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >> >> writes:
> >> >> > > > >> has anyone tried or used 3.3 yet?  what would be
> >>
> >> implications
> >>
> >> >> or undesired side effects from rebuilding my system?  is
> >> >> there direct confliction with glibc?  i doubt it.  any
> >> >> suggestions from anyone who has more knowledge than i do
> >> >> would be well appreciated :-)
> >> >>
> >> >> > > > > I have an Athlon XP and rebuild alsmost my whole system
> >>
> >> with
> >>
> >> >> gcc 3.3.
> >> >>
> >> >> > > > > KDE, QT, X, xine, xmms, most of the packages in 'system'
> >>
> >> like
> >>
> >> >> bash, tar, textutil, libtool, awk,sed, grep...
> >> >>
> >> >> > > > > Gcc 3.3 is fast.. and I had no problems so far, but I have
> >>
> >> not
> >>
> >> >> tried to build a kernel yet.
> >> >>
> >> >> > > > I have built 2.5.69 and 2.5.70 on an K6-2 with gcc-3.3. Seems
> >>
> >> to
> >>
> >> >> work fine (for me). No crashes yet, with 2.5.69 I had an uptime of
> >>
> >> a couple of weeks, before I booted to 2.5.70 three days ago.
> >>
> >> >> > > 2.5.6X is still a nono for me.. every version freezes my system
> >>
> >> at
> >>
> >> >> bootup.. and 2.4.21-rc* is fine for me.
> >> >>
> >> >> > > Gl�ck Auf
> >> >> > > Volker
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > --
> >> >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Mike Bohan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >> --
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> >
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > ------------------------
> > Microsoft / Intel free
> > ------------------------
> >
> >
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------
Microsoft / Intel free
------------------------


--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Reply via email to