Kevin O'Gorman <[email protected]> writes: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Alan McKinnon > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Apparently, though unproven, at 20:54 on Friday 19 November 2010, Allan >> Gottlieb did opine thusly: >> >> > > It seems, however, that you're still going down the path of emerge >> > > >> > > -e @world. Why is that? If it's just to be confident that everything >> > > is back to the way it should be then I understand that. I've done it >> > > myself many times in the last 12 years. >> > >> > Yes that is the reason. >> >> >> Sounds like the big guns approach, can be valid at times. >> >> I'm usually the first one to chip in about emerge -e world being stupid >> when >> someone reads the gcc upgrade guide, but sometimes you have a box that just >> will not fix itself despite hours of troubleshooting. In a case like this a >> full remerge often fixes mysterious but actual real problems. >> >> > I've had pretty much the same thing happen. In my case, 'eix' showed that I > had 0.9.8p and 1.0.0 installed > in two different slots. However the 3 files that belong to 0.9.8 were > missing. Fortunately, I run with --buildpkg > so I had a binary package lying around. Emerging it with -gK restored the > files, and everything was okay. > > OTOH, a couple of years ago I did an emerge -e and regretted it. It kept > stopping because something wasn't > configured right, and I had to go through dispatch-conf on everything up to > that point before I could get it to > proceed. Good luck with your "few days". Mine was more like 2 weeks of > stop-and-go.
It finished in just under one day. I use elogviewer which can show logs in any order, but really there was little to look at. Fairly clean all the way through. allan
