Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Re: 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-19 Thread Philipp Riegger

On Apr 15, 2006, at 6:10 PM, Duncan wrote:

But i really think this is not about helping but about confusion.  
If i
post my emerge --info you don't know if i really use confcache  
even if i
have FEATURES=confcache, because emerge --info does not say if i  
have
emerged confcache and, if i have emerged it, which version it is.  
I think

this should also be listed in emerge --info.


Very good point.


Should i file a bug on this?

Philipp

--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



Portage Features That Depend on Binaries [WAS: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Re: 2.1 release candidate soon? ]

2006-04-19 Thread Alec Warner
Philipp Riegger wrote:
 On Apr 15, 2006, at 6:10 PM, Duncan wrote:
 
 But i really think this is not about helping but about confusion.  If i
 post my emerge --info you don't know if i really use confcache  even
 if i
 have FEATURES=confcache, because emerge --info does not say if i  have
 emerged confcache and, if i have emerged it, which version it is.  I
 think
 this should also be listed in emerge --info.


 Very good point.
 
 
 Should i file a bug on this?
 
 Philipp
 

Nope, lets bring it to -dev ( yay crossposting )

The issue for those on the -dev ML, is that portage has some features
that require binaries ( sandbox, ccache, confcache ) and so you need two
things for them to work.  You need FEATURES={sandbox,ccache,confcache}
and you need each package installed.  The FEATURES line is already
printed.  sandbox is already in info_pkgs.

Is there any problem with adding dev-util/confcache and dev-util/ccache
to info_pkgs?
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list