On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 15:29:48 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 01/12/2010 12:23 AM, Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 09:25:51PM +0100, Raaal Porcel wrote:
> >> scarabeus told me that the eclass can't be removed until two years since
> >> the deprecation date, so...
> >>
> >> Removal
Dale posted on Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:06:06 -0600 as excerpted:
> I am subscribed to -user as well. I been using Gentoo since the 1.4
> days. This is about improving portage which is a good thing to talk
> about here. The devs do it, not the user. ;-) Also, I already know
> how to use portage pr
On 01/17/2010 11:12 PM, David Leverton wrote:
> On Sunday 17 January 2010 20:38:48 Petteri Räty wrote:
>> With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't
>> annoy users any more with ebeep or epause so attached is a patch only
>> defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1 and 2. Any
On 01/25/2010 07:07 PM, Dale wrote:
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 25.1.2010 18.20, Jacob Godserv wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty
>>> wrote:
I should also add that this is not a user support mailing list as
there's
gentoo-user for that purpose. I think the origin
Petteri Räty wrote:
On 25.1.2010 18.20, Jacob Godserv wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty
wrote:
I should also add that this is not a user support mailing list as
there's
gentoo-user for that purpose. I think the original purpose of the
thread was
already fulfilled.
So then
On 25.1.2010 18.06, Dale wrote:
I am subscribed to -user as well. I been using Gentoo since the 1.4
days. This is about improving portage which is a good thing to talk
about here. The devs do it, not the user. ;-) Also, I already know how
to use portage pretty good. I'm not asking for support ju
On 25.1.2010 18.20, Jacob Godserv wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty wrote:
I should also add that this is not a user support mailing list as there's
gentoo-user for that purpose. I think the original purpose of the thread was
already fulfilled.
So then how was the original pr
Hi,
(although this is no user support list...)
On 2010-01-25 11:02 UTC Dale wrote:
> So there is already a option that is the reverse of -n ?
See `man emerge`:
--depclean (-c)
[...]
Depclean serves as a dependency aware version of --unmerge. When given
one or more atoms, it will unmerge matche
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty wrote:
> I should also add that this is not a user support mailing list as there's
> gentoo-user for that purpose. I think the original purpose of the thread was
> already fulfilled.
So then how was the original problem resolved? Sorry, I missed that
(a
Petteri Räty wrote:
On 25.1.2010 13.30, Petteri Räty wrote:
So there is already a option that is the reverse of -n ?
Dale
:-) :-)
You would first have to define the reverse to avoid misunderstanding.
--noreplace (-n)
Skips the packages specified on the command-line that have already been
2010/1/17 Krzysiek Pawlik :
> On 01/17/10 18:20, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>>> Please: When you run tools which break checksums/dates of the database,
>>> give the user the possibility to decide whether he really wants this.
>>
>> Good point, I didn't realize that. However, I'd rather fix the tool
On 25.1.2010 13.30, Petteri Räty wrote:
So there is already a option that is the reverse of -n ?
Dale
:-) :-)
You would first have to define the reverse to avoid misunderstanding.
--noreplace (-n)
Skips the packages specified on the command-line that have already been
installed.
Reverse:
On 25.1.2010 13.02, Dale wrote:
Petteri Räty wrote:
On 01/25/2010 04:28 AM, Dale wrote:
Well put. I would agree that a simple warning should be given before
removing a system package or a package that system must have, especially
portage.
Maybe what portage needs is a reverse -n feature. Instea
2010-01-24 22:15:17 Mike Frysinger napisał(a):
> On Sunday 24 January 2010 00:12:39 Benny Pedersen wrote:
> > it removes python-wrapper and this remove python link from
> > /usr/bin/python linked to /usr/bin/python-wrapper so all portage does
> > not work after this, but i solved it with a quickpkg
Petteri Räty wrote:
On 01/25/2010 04:28 AM, Dale wrote:
Well put. I would agree that a simple warning should be given before
removing a system package or a package that system must have, especially
portage.
Maybe what portage needs is a reverse -n feature. Instead of adding
something to the
On 01/25/2010 04:28 AM, Dale wrote:
>
> Well put. I would agree that a simple warning should be given before
> removing a system package or a package that system must have, especially
> portage.
> Maybe what portage needs is a reverse -n feature. Instead of adding
> something to the world file,
On 01/25/2010 02:02 AM, Dale wrote:
> Is there something that I am missing here? For me, system should
> include the things needed for booting and for the package manager to
> work. If it can't contain python then portage has a problem. As I
> pointed out in another reply, portage won't let you
17 matches
Mail list logo
