On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 17:06:02 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: > > I think it is being over-cautious, which results in packages being > > rebuilt multiple time unnecessarily, but I's rather give it the > > chance to fix itself. That said, I've never had a list anything like > > 50 packages long, but I do update frequently. > > > It wasn't that I had 50 packages in the emerge -DuN @world. That was > something like 10. It was after that finished and I ran > @preserved-rebuild that it said 50 packages were effected by something > it found, but those 50 were all dependent on just one or two packages > that Alan was suggesting to me are held in the preserved database > file, or so I think.
I realised it was 50-odd in the rebuild list, but in my experience multiple runs gradually reduces that number. Maybe portage could be more intelligent about the order in which it re-emerges these packages, but running it enough times always works for me. Removing the registry is potentially risky because you could still have packages linked to a library that is not managed by portage, and that will never update. If someone finds a security hole in that library, you could be in trouble. "Fixing" the problem by deleting the registry is akin to fixing low oil pressure in your car by disconnecting the warning light. -- Neil Bothwick We are THOR of Borg... your RFC compliant mailbox has been assimilated
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
