[gentoo-user] emerge all packages which depend on P : how to
Hi, I have a very simple question. How to emerge (update) all packages which depend on some given package P. I've tried emerge -uv1 `equery -q d P` or emerge -uv1 `qdepends -q -Q P` but both commands (equery and qdepends) generate a list with the version attached like app-editors/kile-2.1.3 which emerge doesn't like (unless there is an '= in front of each name) Is there an easy way to do so without resorting to shell/python scripting? Many thanks for a hint, Helmut
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all packages which depend on P : how to
2014-02-20 13:38 GMT+01:00 Helmut Jarausch jarau...@igpm.rwth-aachen.de: Hi, I have a very simple question. How to emerge (update) all packages which depend on some given package P. I've tried emerge -uv1 `equery -q d P` or emerge -uv1 `qdepends -q -Q P` but both commands (equery and qdepends) generate a list with the version attached like app-editors/kile-2.1.3 which emerge doesn't like (unless there is an '= in front of each name) Is there an easy way to do so without resorting to shell/python scripting? Many thanks for a hint, Helmut Hi, I just had a look on eix and figured out that eix --deps -# -I P lists all packages in short for that are installed and have P in their dependency variables plus the package itself. Hope to help -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Randolph Maaßen
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all packages which depend on P : how to
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 13:38:06 +0100, Helmut Jarausch wrote: I've tried emerge -uv1 `equery -q d P` or emerge -uv1 `qdepends -q -Q P` but both commands (equery and qdepends) generate a list with the version attached like app-editors/kile-2.1.3 which emerge doesn't like (unless there is an '= in front of each name) Is there an easy way to do so without resorting to shell/python scripting? Stripping the version, which you can do with qatom, is not a good idea because it will only reinstall the newest version of any slotted packages. Best to use sed to prefix each atom with = emerge -1a $(qdepends -qQ P | sed 's/^/=/') Also, the use of -u in your examples means currently installed packages will not be re-emerged, unless a newer version is available. -- Neil Bothwick Monday is the root of all evil! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark I wanted to follow up on my somewhat cavalier comment a couple of days ago about doing emerge -C on a dependency. It was a bad comment for me to make without adding some discussion around it. This can actually harm your system if you emerge -C the wrong dependency. For instance, emerge -C gcc or python is likely a bad thing to do as you will be unable to build anything to get the system fixed again. However emerge -C jack-audio-connection-kit as a dependency for something like Ardour wouldn't harm the system but would demonstrate what I was talking about. Any new user reading this thread at some future date should ensure that (at a minimum) if they emerge -C anything at all that at least it's not part of @system. emerge should warn of this but it's best to do a little study before pushing the enter key. Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
Mark Knecht wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Mark Knechtmarkkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM,meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark I wanted to follow up on my somewhat cavalier comment a couple of days ago about doing emerge -C on a dependency. It was a bad comment for me to make without adding some discussion around it. This can actually harm your system if you emerge -C the wrong dependency. For instance, emerge -C gcc or python is likely a bad thing to do as you will be unable to build anything to get the system fixed again. However emerge -C jack-audio-connection-kit as a dependency for something like Ardour wouldn't harm the system but would demonstrate what I was talking about. Any new user reading this thread at some future date should ensure that (at a minimum) if they emerge -C anything at all that at least it's not part of @system. emerge should warn of this but it's best to do a little study before pushing the enter key. Cheers, Mark It is good that you explained that more. I thought about the same thing but thought maybe I was missing something that was mentioned earlier in another message. I wouldn't always count on portage warning before removing a system package tho. I tested this by trying to remove python and portage said nothing it doesn't say on any other package even one in the world file. Future users may want to ask first either here or on the forums before removing something that may be questionable. It may not be a bad idea for a thread with packages that should never be removed. Things such as gcc, python, baselayout etc. Maybe a user would find that and at least have a general guide. I also think it would be a good idea to have the same on the forums as a sticky thread that the mods can edit from time to time. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Mark Knecht wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Mark Knechtmarkkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM,meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark I wanted to follow up on my somewhat cavalier comment a couple of days ago about doing emerge -C on a dependency. It was a bad comment for me to make without adding some discussion around it. This can actually harm your system if you emerge -C the wrong dependency. For instance, emerge -C gcc or python is likely a bad thing to do as you will be unable to build anything to get the system fixed again. However emerge -C jack-audio-connection-kit as a dependency for something like Ardour wouldn't harm the system but would demonstrate what I was talking about. Any new user reading this thread at some future date should ensure that (at a minimum) if they emerge -C anything at all that at least it's not part of @system. emerge should warn of this but it's best to do a little study before pushing the enter key. Cheers, Mark It is good that you explained that more. I thought about the same thing but thought maybe I was missing something that was mentioned earlier in another message. I wouldn't always count on portage warning before removing a system package tho. I tested this by trying to remove python and portage said nothing it doesn't say on any other package even one in the world file. Future users may want to ask first either here or on the forums before removing something that may be questionable. It may not be a bad idea for a thread with packages that should never be removed. Things such as gcc, python, baselayout etc. Maybe a user would find that and at least have a general guide. I also think it would be a good idea to have the same on the forums as a sticky thread that the mods can edit from time to time. Dale Dale, The last thing I want to do is cause anyone any trouble. From that point it's easier to just stay quiet all the time and let others more experienced than myself answer all the questions. However I don't really want to act that way - taking and never giving. I like your idea about lists of packages that should never be removed. Personally I think a doc doc page somewhere in the install/maintenance doc group would be good but it would need to be well maintained. Understanding the absolute minimum number of things that are required to use emerge and get a package built would be a good doc, if it doesn't exist somewhere already. Personally I'm never 100% sure about anything that's not an application package I installed myself and is sitting in the world file. I suspect others - possibly you included - have similar fears at times. Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
Mark Knecht wrote: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Mark Knecht wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Mark Knechtmarkkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM,meino.cra...@gmx.dewrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark I wanted to follow up on my somewhat cavalier comment a couple of days ago about doing emerge -C on a dependency. It was a bad comment for me to make without adding some discussion around it. This can actually harm your system if you emerge -C the wrong dependency. For instance, emerge -C gcc or python is likely a bad thing to do as you will be unable to build anything to get the system fixed again. However emerge -C jack-audio-connection-kit as a dependency for something like Ardour wouldn't harm the system but would demonstrate what I was talking about. Any new user reading this thread at some future date should ensure that (at a minimum) if they emerge -C anything at all that at least it's not part of @system. emerge should warn of this but it's best to do a little study before pushing the enter key. Cheers, Mark It is good that you explained that more. I thought about the same thing but thought maybe I was missing something that was mentioned earlier in another message. I wouldn't always count on portage warning before removing a system package tho. I tested this by trying to remove python and portage said nothing it doesn't say on any other package even one in the world file. Future users may want to ask first either here or on the forums before removing something that may be questionable. It may not be a bad idea for a thread with packages that should never be removed. Things such as gcc, python, baselayout etc. Maybe a user would find that and at least have a general guide. I also think it would be a good idea to have the same on the forums as a sticky thread that the mods can edit from time to time. Dale Dale, The last thing I want to do is cause anyone any trouble. From that point it's easier to just stay quiet all the time and let others more experienced than myself answer all the questions. However I don't really want to act that way - taking and never giving. I like your idea about lists of packages that should never be removed. Personally I think a doc doc page somewhere in the install/maintenance doc group would be good but it would need to be well maintained. Understanding the absolute minimum number of things that are required to use emerge and get a package built would be a good doc, if it doesn't exist somewhere already. Personally I'm never 100% sure about anything that's not an application package I installed myself and is sitting in the world file. I suspect others - possibly you included - have similar fears at times. Cheers, Mark I know there are times when I don't say anything because I am unsure about the answer. If I do say something, I usually say I'm not sure or something to that effect. Like you, I never want to make matters worse than they already are for someone. I wouldn't want someone to do me that way either. I mentioned this on -dev once when this topic came up. Thing is, portage is not the only package manager being used. Personally I think portage should be the official package manager and if you chose to use something else, you should know what not to do to the system. Portage requires python but I think one of the other package managers uses C or something. Remove C on my rig, no big deal as far as being able to boot and re-emerge a package. Do it on a system with some other package manager and you are in a mess. Point being, it's sort of hard for them to list them since it depends on what package manager you are using. There are some packages I installed and still don't know much about. lol Sort of funny in a way. Most of them just work so we don't need to know much about them. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP I mentioned this on -dev once when this topic came up. Thing is, portage is not the only package manager being used. That's an important point. Personally I think portage should be the official package manager and if you chose to use something else, you should know what not to do to the system. Unofficially I think it is! ;-) Portage requires python but I think one of the other package managers uses C or something. Remove C on my rig, no big deal as far as being able to boot and re-emerge a package. Careful. Can you really emerge gcc without at least one version of gcc on the system? I didn't think so unless you've got access to a binary somewhere, such as the install tarball or something like that. Even that could be a problem. I did some cleanup a few years ago that removed an old version of gcc and found I couldn't build anything anymore. Embarrassing! Do it on a system with some other package manager and you are in a mess. Point being, it's sort of hard for them to list them since it depends on what package manager you are using. True, and a more experienced user can use equery, among other tools, to determine what dependencies a package has. Problem was my previous answer didn't mention that. There are some packages I installed and still don't know much about. lol Sort of funny in a way. Most of them just work so we don't need to know much about them. Actually, for me it's _most_ packages I know NOTHING about. This machine has XFCE, Gnome and KDE. It has only 38 packages in the world file and yet emerge -e @world would build 970 packages. That's a LOT of unknown stuff for a user type like me to know anything about! (Or honestly, I probably know _NOTHING_ at all about at least 900 of those packages...) Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:40:56 -0500, Dale wrote: I mentioned this on -dev once when this topic came up. Thing is, portage is not the only package manager being used. Personally I think portage should be the official package manager and if you chose to use something else, you should know what not to do to the system. That's restrictive and un-Gentoo-like. The official package manager is anything that follows the EAPI specs. Portage requires python but I think one of the other package managers uses C or something. Remove C on my rig, no big deal as far as being able to boot and re-emerge a package. Do it on a system with some other package manager and you are in a mess. Point being, it's sort of hard for them to list them since it depends on what package manager you are using. That's a slightly different issue. No, portage isn't in @system directly, but it is part of a list of package managers, one of which must be installed, and Python is a dependency of that, so a warning would be reasonable if you were using portage to do the unmerging. However, emerge -C does warn against its use these days, and you shouldn't really use it on anything that is not in @world. -- Neil Bothwick TEXAS VIRUS: Makes sure that it's bigger than any other file. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 20:08:34 Neil Bothwick wrote: I mentioned this on -dev once when this topic came up. Thing is, portage is not the only package manager being used. Personally I think portage should be the official package manager and if you chose to use something else, you should know what not to do to the system. That's restrictive and un-Gentoo-like. The official package manager is anything that follows the EAPI specs. I wholeheartedly agree. There shouldn't even BE such a thing as a standard package manager, there should only be standards. Otherwise you get into the standard being whatever portage is doing today - a moving target at best -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
Mark Knecht wrote: On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP I mentioned this on -dev once when this topic came up. Thing is, portage is not the only package manager being used. That's an important point. Personally I think portage should be the official package manager and if you chose to use something else, you should know what not to do to the system. Unofficially I think it is! ;-) Going by a few folks on -dev, I sometimes wonder if portage even exists. Sort of making a mountain out of a mole hill there. Portage requires python but I think one of the other package managers uses C or something. Remove C on my rig, no big deal as far as being able to boot and re-emerge a package. Careful. Can you really emerge gcc without at least one version of gcc on the system? I didn't think so unless you've got access to a binary somewhere, such as the install tarball or something like that. Even that could be a problem. I did some cleanup a few years ago that removed an old version of gcc and found I couldn't build anything anymore. Embarrassing! Most likely not but you can't emerge anything without python either. Yet some have emerge -C python a few times. I read where one even removed portage. I'm not sure how a person can think portage will work if you remove it. o_O Do it on a system with some other package manager and you are in a mess. Point being, it's sort of hard for them to list them since it depends on what package manager you are using. True, and a more experienced user can use equery, among other tools, to determine what dependencies a package has. Problem was my previous answer didn't mention that. Ahhh, but equery isn't always right either. That has been shown on this list before. It's a good tool but I wouldn't want to put my life in its hands. There are some packages I installed and still don't know much about. lol Sort of funny in a way. Most of them just work so we don't need to know much about them. Actually, for me it's _most_ packages I know NOTHING about. This machine has XFCE, Gnome and KDE. It has only 38 packages in the world file and yet emerge -e @world would build 970 packages. That's a LOT of unknown stuff for a user type like me to know anything about! (Or honestly, I probably know _NOTHING_ at all about at least 900 of those packages...) Cheers, Mark I got more in my world file but you have more packages. Sort of odd in a way. Packages installed: 945 Packages in world:76 Packages in system: 50 Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] emerge all but...
Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com [10-06-28 19:16]: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark Hi Mark, thanks a lot! You helped me! Best regards, mcc
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:43 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com [10-06-28 19:16]: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark Hi Mark, thanks a lot! You helped me! Best regards, mcc :-) Glad it was easy! Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
wouldn't it be: emerge -o package ? emerge -DuN package _will_ install the package itself. On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:55 AM, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: Hi, is it possible to emerge all missing dependencies of a certain application without emerging the application itself? And: Will I hurt the system that way? Best regards, mcc ??? emerge -DuN application ??? What am I missing in the question? Test it on a clean app with no dependencies missing. It should emerge nothing. Then emerge -C one dependency and try it again. It should pick up that dependency but not emerge the app itself. You will not hurt your system doing that command. - Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Crístian Viana cristiandei...@gmail.com wrote: wouldn't it be: emerge -o package ? No, I believe that would emerge the package _without_ emerging the dependencies. If I understood the OP's original question he wanted to make sure package dependencies were emerged if missing for some reason. (For instance, he's done an emerge --depclean and it cleaned out something that he still needs.) Cheers, Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] emerge all but...
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Crístian Viana cristiandei...@gmail.com wrote: wouldn't it be: emerge -o package ? No, I believe that would emerge the package _without_ emerging the dependencies. If I understood the OP's original question he wanted to make sure package dependencies were emerged if missing for some reason. (For instance, he's done an emerge --depclean and it cleaned out something that he still needs.) Cheers, Mark Oops! My mistake. I was looking at capital O, not lower case o. Yes, according to the man page your solution would work also. Cheers, Mark
