Re: [gentoo-dev] bootstrapping since gcc 3.4 is stable

On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 16:55 -0600, MIkey wrote: Jan Kundrát wrote: Those are bugs against the revdep-rebuild package. Which is one of the suggested methods to migrate gcc. Not necessary from stage1... How does the listing of revdep-rebuild bugs have anything to do with this topic? None

Re: [gentoo-dev] Not offering help to certain parts of society

On Sat, 2006-04-01 at 16:41 +, George Prowse wrote: The problem is that we are in no way helping our Amish friends. If we made it easier to use linux then i'm sure they'd embrace FOSS straight away! I suggest some measures that would help them integrate better because it may be frowned

Re: [gentoo-dev] tools-portage herd unmaintained packages

On 12/25/12 08:09, Pacho Ramos wrote: El mar, 06-11-2012 a las 12:35 -0600, Paul Varner escribió: All: The following packages in the tools-portage herd are effectively unmaintained packages and need a maintainer to step up and maintain them. app-portage/deltup app-portage/epm app-portage

Re: [gentoo-dev] tools-portage herd unmaintained packages

On 12/25/12 12:03, Sven Eden wrote: Hi all, what has happened to app-portage/ufed? I could take care of it. I am no official dev, but maybe via a proxy maintainership? Would that be possible? Yes, I'm willing to proxy maintain app-portage/ufed. The sources are available from

Re: [gentoo-dev] tools-portage herd unmaintained packages

On 12/26/12 11:00, Paul Varner wrote: On 12/25/12 08:09, Pacho Ramos wrote: El mar, 06-11-2012 a las 12:35 -0600, Paul Varner escribió: All: The following packages in the tools-portage herd are effectively unmaintained packages and need a maintainer to step up and maintain them. app

[gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding

All: Time for some bikeshedding :) For the gentoolkit-0.3.0 series, I removed any filtering of emerge options set in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPS for revdep-rebuild. This has caused some people to complain because some of the flags in their EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS are not suitable for a revdep-rebuild run.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrites: app-misc/secure-delete, app-misc/ccal, www-apache/mod_vhs, app-portage/epm, www-apps/online-bookmarks, sys-apps/i2c

added to the tree that fixes most of the bugs. I have removed the package mask entry and updated metadata and bugzilla appropriately. Regards, Paul Varner tools-portage lead

[gentoo-dev] tools-portage herd status

All: The tool-portage herd is currently understaffed and as such is not making updates in a timely fashion. Currently the herd consists of zmedico and myself. While Zac has done a good job where he can, he has a full time job with maintaining and updating portage. In my case, my real life job

[gentoo-dev] Last Rites: app-text/manedit

# Paul Varner fuzzy...@gentoo.org (26 Apr 2010) # Masking for removal (bug #315947). # It doesn't compile with newer versions of zlib, still uses gtk1+, and # upstream is unresponsive. Unfortunately, there is not a suitable # replacement. app-text/manedit

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-portage/gentoolkit: ChangeLog gentoolkit-0.2.4_rc1.ebuild

On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 18:39 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: On 00:18 Thu 27 Sep , Paul Varner (fuzzyray) wrote: pkg_postrm() { python_mod_cleanup ${ROOT}usr/lib/gentoolkit Shouldn't gentoolkit go into get_libdir() instead of lib? Portage appears to... It probably should

Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and subproject status

On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 22:31 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we going to do? Please project leaders try to reply in short. tools-portage: Are we fine? The short answer is no. We need more developers. Unfortunately, real life work

Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Bo Ørsted Andresen (zlin)

On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 14:28 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: He has been breaking the tree for a while now but as Calchan has been having availability problems I get to insult him a little bit later than usual. Bo hails from Aalborg, Denmark. He studies to become a control engineer. On the Gentoo

[gentoo-dev] echangelog maintainer needed

releases whenever it needs to be done. Regards, Paul Varner Lead, Gentoo Portage Tools -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 08:44 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote: Hi, packages that are in a herd, but could need someone dedicated to it: app-portage/elogv, elogviewer, kelogviewer (tools-portage) -- low maintenance I'll take care of these packages. Regards, Paul

Re: [gentoo-dev] Usages of CVS $Header$ keyword in ebuilds - use cases wanted

On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 13:40 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: Q: How much have you utilized the primary use case? Not at all Q: Are there any other use-cases you have and actively use? No

[gentoo-dev] Last Rites: app-portage/udept

# Paul Varner fuzzy...@gentoo.org (14 Dec 2008) # Dead upstream, masked for removal in ~30 to 60 days. app-portage/udept Additionally, it doesn't play well with EAPI's greater than zero. The removal bug is Bug #250839. If upstream comes back alive or someone forks and actively maintains, I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask

On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 06:56 +0100, Elfyn McBratney wrote: The way I see it, we have three options: - package.mask (downgrades for those early adopters) - keep the same layout (/etc/apache2/conf, etc.) and wait until 2.2 is out to change it - have the newer apache ebuilds migrate from

Re: [gentoo-dev] [Bug 89729] configure always print a warning message about possibly mistaking build system type

On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 09:52 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wednesday 20 April 2005 08:27 am, Harald van Dk wrote: Perhaps make.conf.example (that's provided by portage, right?) should include CBUILD, assuming it doesn't cause problems? i'm afraid the possibility of users botching this

Re: [gentoo-dev] New apache stuff in testing - please package.mask it

On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 05:48 +0100, Elfyn McBratney wrote: I've filed a bug[1] requesting that ebuilds with updated apache stuff (anything using the new apache-module or depend.apache eclass/the new install layout) be package.mask'd due to the regressions and breakages in testing. I may

Re: [gentoo-dev] module-rebuild

On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 00:00 +0100, John Mylchreest wrote: Can I please introduce into the tree sys-kernel/module-rebuild. This tracks linux-mod installed kernel modules, and also gives you the ability to remove/add/toggle the list of modules to rebuild. Basically.. following a kernel upgrade

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.12-r2 request for testers

On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 21:59 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wednesday 25 May 2005 06:20 pm, Mike Frysinger wrote: yes, it's finally that time ... after months of hearing us say 'we want to get new baselayout stable asap', we're serious last chance ! can someone forward the original

[gentoo-dev] Request for testing revdep-rebuild (gentoolkit-0.2.1_pre3)

All: I have bumped gentoolkit to 0.2.1_pre3 and package masked it for architecture testing and general testing of the new improved revdep-rebuild. This version contains lots of bug fixes and I would like give it a workout before unmasking. There are some major changes in identifying the broken

[gentoo-dev] Unmasking of gentoolkit-0.2.1_pre3

Unless there are objections, I am planning on unmasking gentoolkit-0.2.1_pre3 this weekend. This build of gentoolkit contains the new version of revdep-rebuild. This version has been in the tree and package masked since 12 June. During that time, I have not received any bug reports and the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Unmasking of gentoolkit-0.2.1_pre3

On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 14:47 +0200, Sven Köhler wrote: Last time i used revdep-rebuild, i saw that revdep-rebuild does check things twice, since therere symlinks like /usr/X11R6/lib to /usr/lib. It this fixed in the new version? Yes it is. Here is the list of bug fixes and enhancements: *

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-config 2.0 development

On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 18:14 -0400, Daniel Ostrow wrote: On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 15:12 -0700, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 22:19 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | but I think having the xml configuration files allows a much more | robust configuration. How so? Using

Re: [gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild

On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 16:32 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: On Sunday 14 August 2005 16:20, Stefan Jones wrote: But you could use ldconfig -p to gain a list of all the libraries, put them in a hash table and then use scanelf. Please don't. FreeBSD's ldconfig is *not* the same and

[gentoo-dev] Binary packages and revdep-rebuild

One of the common complaints with revdep-rebuild is that it wants to constantly rebuild binary packages (most notably openoffice-bin). To assist in resolving this issue, I have released gentoolkit-0.2.1_pre9 which adds the capability for an ebuild maintainer to adjust how revdep-rebuild behaves

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving GCC-3.4 to stable on x86

On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 18:37 +0100, Andreas Proschofsky wrote: It's not that easy for every package. For instance openoffice and openoffice-bin need to got to the same location, cause OOo does a user install and this will break when changing between them (and all the settings / paths and so

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization

since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x

Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 09:45 +0100, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: On 2/27/12 10:37 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: I think somebody pointed some revdep-rebuild versions where exiting with successful code even when failed, was fixed version stabilized? No, it is only in - so far. It has not been

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due jokey retirement

On 03/18/12 13:50, Pacho Ramos wrote: Due his retirement the following packages need a new maintainer: app-portage/maintainer-helper Thanks for taking them I've added app-portage/maintainer-helper to the tools-portage herd, however, I've left it as maintainer-needed. So if anyone wants to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due jokey retirement

On 3/19/12 2:26 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: El lun, 19-03-2012 a las 10:56 -0500, Paul Varner escribió: On 03/18/12 13:50, Pacho Ramos wrote: Due his retirement the following packages need a new maintainer: app-portage/maintainer-helper Thanks for taking them I've added app-portage/maintainer

[gentoo-dev] tools-portage herd unmaintained packages

will be moving them out of the herd and to maintainer-needed and they will be candidates for the treecleaners. Regards, Paul Varner tools-portage lead

Re: [gentoo-dev] Missing: Universal-CD - Gentoo discriminates shell and networkless users

On Mon, 2006-10-09 at 23:30 -0400, Kari Hazzard wrote: The point is that if you build Gentoo to be developer-friendly rather than user-friendly, Gentoo will be replaced by something else. User-centric design is why Gentoo is/was different from everything else. Take away choices that people

Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing Daniel Robbins (drobbins)

On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 19:06 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: It's my please to introduce to you Daniel drobbins Robbins. Welcome back Daniel, it is good to see you back. Regards, Paul -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Everyone developer should downgrade back to gentoolkit-dev-0.2.6.2

On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 21:56 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Saturday 24 March 2007, Petteri Räty wrote: Joshua Baergen kirjoitti: It appears to be a problem with gentoolkit-dev-0.2.6.3. 0.2.6.2 produces proper changelogs. Until the problem is solved everyone should downgrade back to

Re: [gentoo-dev] That time again...

On Wed, 2007-04-25 at 20:12 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote: G-cpan-0.15 was put out last night; 99% bug fixes, a few easter eggs, and some tweaks. Any other cool updates in the last few weeks? (it's been 20 days since the last time I started this thread - at this rate, we might make enough input

[gentoo-dev] tools-portage herd status

On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 09:08 -0500, Paul Varner wrote: All: The tool-portage herd is currently understaffed and as such is not making updates in a timely fashion. Currently the herd consists of zmedico and myself. While Zac has done a good job where he can, he has a full time job

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due truedfx retirement

On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 18:34 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: Due truedfx retirement the following packages need a new maintainer: app-editors/le app-editors/nvi app-editors/ted app-misc/glastree app-portage/cfg-update dev-libs/librep dev-libs/tvision dev-util/dialog x11-apps/xkbset

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: news item for png15

On Fri, 2011-10-14 at 23:03 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: It shouldn't, I am sure I have used this some times before and it worked as expected, but I don't know when revdep-rebuild cache files are removed (and then, broken packages recalculated) :-/ Any revdep-rebuild maintainer here to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages looking for proxy as ian no longer has commit access

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 17:25 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: On Thu, 24 Nov 2011, Pacho Ramos wrote: Due https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99016 ian doesn't have commit access and, then, his packages need a proxy maintainer: app-portage/autounmask app-portage/demerge I would

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: gentoolkit: Make portage.config object a global object

On Tue, 2005-09-20 at 19:00 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 06:55:44PM -0500, Paul Varner wrote: On Tue, 2005-09-20 at 18:34 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: Updated patch to add a semaphore to control access to the global portage.config object. Unless anyone sees any

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] ECONF_EXTRA handling: bug 38618

On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 16:03 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: It allows for users to override ebuild defined configure options, potentially shooting themselves in the foot, but in the same token they can already shoot themselves in the foot via EXTRA_ECONF... Since EXTRA_ECONF is all about letting

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] emerge-webrsync patch

On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 13:04 +0100, Johannes Fahrenkrug wrote: I put a nice -n 19 in front of the tar, rsync and emerge metadata commands because normally calling emerge-webrsync renders my box unusable for 15 to 20 minutes. You still notice a difference when using nice but everything seems

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] emerge-webrsync patch

On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 17:38 +0100, Johannes Fahrenkrug wrote: Good point. Is this patch better? Or should it rather be _exactly_ as it is in revdep-rebuild? I personally would do it the same way as revdep-rebuild since that causes the entire script and anything it calls to be run at the value

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-2.1_pre5

On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 20:07 -0500, Alec Warner wrote: Your testing is appreciated. The only thing that I have noted so far is that every emerge command is printing ** before it does anything else. For example: # emerge -pv portage ** These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-2.1_pre5

On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 20:07 -0500, Alec Warner wrote: Your testing is appreciated. I'll file a bug for this one, once I investigate further. 'genlop -t' doesn't get along with it very well. # genlop -t screen * app-misc/screen snip Thu Dec 15 23:10:28 2005 app-misc/screen-4.0.2-r4

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-2.1_pre5

On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 18:35 -0800, Zac Medico wrote: After you've updated to the new ebuild (with patch), run `sed -i 's/ Emerging/ emerge/g' /var/log/emerge.log` and genlop should work correctly again. Did all of the above and everything is looking good. Thanks for the quick response

[gentoo-portage-dev] portage-2.1 and gentoolkit-0.2.2

Just a reminder that due to the changes in portage-2.1, that it breaks gentoolkit-0.2.1 which is the current stable version. I have placed gentoolkit-0.2.2 in the tree which works with portage-2.1 and opened bug #135068 http://bugs.gentoo.org/135068 I have not added the arch teams to the bug

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-2.1 and gentoolkit-0.2.2

improved. On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 14:49 -0500, Paul Varner wrote: If portage-2.1 is requested to be marked stable before then, we need to also make the same request for gentoolkit, so that we don't break it. I don't think that we need to fast track marking gentoolkit-0.2.2 stable at this point

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] making permission/ownership retention consistent

On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 02:20 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: personally i think that we should be retaining the permissions of the file as is instead of resetting it, but i wont fight too hard in either direction ... we just need the behavior to be consistent I agree with retaining permissions

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] glsa-check wrong

On Sun, 2006-07-09 at 19:34 +0200, Radoslaw Stachowiak wrote: glsa-check returns errorlevels 255 which results in shell being unable to parse it (anything greater 255 is 0). I've opened Bug #139804 to track this. Regards, Paul -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] RFC: new virtual metadata variable to list combined deps

On Thu, 2006-10-26 at 18:50 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: So now I was wondering a) if I'm the only one who finds this feature useful and b) if adding it at the dbapi level (in dbapi.aux_get) would be considered a good idea, so it could be used by other tools? Not sure if it would fit better in

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] REVDEP-REBUILD and emerge default options

On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 20:04 +0200, Arthur D. wrote: I am very much against allowing EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS in revdep-rebuild since I went through hell trying to support it when it was first added as a feature to portage and I really don't want to go through that again. Paul, there's good

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] equery displays warnings about masked deps, even when those deps are deeper than --depth specification

On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 15:40 +0200, Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: is this a bug? As the gentoolkit maintainer, I would say that it is a bug. Which version of gentoolkit do you have installed? Regards, Paul

[gentoo-portage-dev] tools-portage packages

-manpages [gentoo] vap...@gentoo.org -- Actively maintained by Mike. * app-portage/elogv [gentoo] fuzzy...@gentoo.org (Paul Varner) sp...@gentoo.org (Sebastian Pipping) -- Being maintained more by Sebastian than myself. * app-portage/elogviewer [gentoo] fuzzy...@gentoo.org (Paul Varner

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] tools-portage packages

Based upon all of the responses, this is the list of completely unmaintained packages managed by tools-portage. If no one objects, I will send this list to gentoo-dev in a few days asking for maintainers or they will be last rited. app-portage/deltup app-portage/epm

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCHES] Remove --autounmask, rename --autounmask-write to --autounmask

On 11/21/13 03:21, Alexander Berntsen wrote: After talking to zmedico privately, and raising the issue and discussing it with people in bug #481578[0], I implemented the behaviour described in a comment[1] on said bug. I sent this to zmedico almost two months ago, but it doesn't look like

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [RFC] Package description index file format for faster emerge search actions

On 10/14/14 02:40, Zac Medico wrote: Hi, As we all know, emerge --search/--searchdesc actions are embarrassingly slow (from most users' perspectives, anyway), especially in comparison to external tools like eix and esearch. Wouldn't it be nice if the performance of emerge's search

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

On 10/21/2015 11:48 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On 22 Oct 2015 00:45, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> On 21 Oct 2015 16:35, Paul Varner wrote: >>> On 10/20/2015 03:34 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: >>>> On 15/10/15 19:42, Paul Varner wrote: >>>>> Over the l

[gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

All: Due to historical reasons the gentoolkit git repository was organized with two branches, gentoolkit and gentoolkit-dev with master effectively being an empty branch. This was confusing to contributers and with git did not make a lot of sense. Over the last couple of days, I have done the

[gentoo-portage-dev] Tools-Portage Lead

All: I inherited the tools-portage lead position on 12/1/2008 when genone retired from Gentoo, and have been the lead since that time. Reading GLEP-39, it is not clear to me if a sub-project needs to have their leads elected or not. Anyhow, I'm asking the following: 1. Do we want to elect a

[gentoo-dev] The Beauty of Unix

On 2/9/16 7:44 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: I thought the whole beauty of unix was the everything-is-a-file design? No, the beauty of Unix has always been the architectural philosophy of loose-coupling of the components of the system. The "everything is a file" is a result of that philosophy. The

Re: [gentoo-dev] Uncoordinated changes

On 02/11/2016 07:34 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > Ultimately, the only way anybody can be assured that their favorite > Gentoo tool will work in a year is if they're maintaining it. It > sounds like nobody was really paying attention to it, which is why > nobody noticed that it was going to break.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News item: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4

On 01/21/2016 06:52 AM, Lars Wendler wrote: > Hi Dirkjan, > > make it part of the news item please. > > Kind regards > Lars > > On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 13:16:19 +0100 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:13 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman >> wrote: >>> After what feels like

Re: [gentoo-dev] why is the security team running around p.masking packages

On 07/06/2016 10:11 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand > wrote: >> On 07/06/2016 03:49 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> >>> I understand that. However, I just sometimes wonder whether that >>> approach makes sense. The result of the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] OT: Screen bragging. Was: [PROPOSAL] Don't split user visible messages across multiple lines

On 03/17/2017 03:51 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 06:58:23 + (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: Brian Dolbec posted on Thu, 16 Mar 2017 01:08:30 -0700 as excerpted: We could also increase the max. line length to something like 120 or 130. I think more people should

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: app-portage/gentoolkit-dev deprecation/removal

On 9/20/17 2:49 AM, Martin Gysel wrote: Am Dienstag, 19. September 2017, 19:10:23 CEST schrieb Paul Varner: emerge --deselect app-portage/gentoolkit-dev emerge --depclean app-portage/gentoolkit-dev why deselect it first? From man emerge, --depclean: "When given one or more

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: app-portage/gentoolkit-dev deprecation/removal

On 9/18/17 3:09 PM, Paul Varner wrote: Please provide any feedback on the upcoming deprecation and removal of app-portage/gentoolkit-dev with the upcoming stabilization of app-portage/gentoolkit-0.4.0 (Bug 627350) Regards, Paul Updated to just tell the user to remove gentoolkit-dev from

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: app-portage/gentoolkit-dev deprecation/removal

Please provide any feedback on the upcoming deprecation and removal of app-portage/gentoolkit-dev with the upcoming stabilization of app-portage/gentoolkit-0.4.0 (Bug 627350) Regards, Paul Title: app-portage/gentoolkit-dev deprecation/removal Author: Paul Varner <fuzzy...@gentoo.org>

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: app-portage/gentoolkit-dev deprecation/removal

On 9/20/17 2:22 PM, Paul Varner wrote: On 9/20/17 2:49 AM, Martin Gysel wrote: Am Dienstag, 19. September 2017, 19:10:23 CEST schrieb Paul Varner: emerge --deselect app-portage/gentoolkit-dev emerge --depclean app-portage/gentoolkit-dev why deselect it first? From man emerge, --depclean