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 from another host
>
> sounds a bug that should be filed so it can be fixed

There's already bug #268724.
Anyway, app-admin/eselect-python probably will have to be added to system
set for a suggested feature for EAPI="5".

--
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis

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. Instead of adding
something to the world file, it removes a unwanted package from the
world file and then the user could use --depclean to remove that package
and its no longer needed friends. I assume this is doable.



You can already use --depclean for this.

Regards,
Petteri



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: Install packages that are not already installed

- This is what Portage does by default

Reverse: Skips packages that are not installed

- Makes no sense with installation actions. Is this what you mean?

pena betelgeuse # emerge --depclean foobar
>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean

Regards,
Petteri

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: Install packages that are not already installed

- This is what Portage does by default

Reverse: Skips packages that are not installed

- Makes no sense with installation actions. Is this what you mean?

pena betelgeuse # emerge --depclean foobar
>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean

Regards,
Petteri



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.


Regards,
Petteri

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
installed.

Reverse: Install packages that are not already installed

- This is what Portage does by default

Reverse: Skips packages that are not installed

- Makes no sense with installation actions. Is this what you mean?

pena betelgeuse # emerge --depclean foobar
>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean

Regards,
Petteri



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.


Regards,
Petteri




Definition of reverse -n option. emerge --remove-from-world pidgin
That would remove the entry pidgin from the world file. Then a user
could use --depclean to remove pidgin and other dependencies that are no
longer needed. There would be no need to use -C in that case.


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 just trying
to improve things.


Dale

:-) :-)

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> 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
(and can't seem to find a resolution in this thread).

--
Jacob

"For then there will be great distress, unequaled
from the beginning of the world until now — and never
to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut
short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the
elect those days will be shortened."

Are you ready?

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 matched packages that have no reverse
dependencies. Use --depclean together with --verbose to show reverse
dependencies.

Patrick.

--
Key ID: 0x86E346D4 http://patrick-nagel.net/key.asc
Fingerprint: 7745 E1BE FA8B FBAD 76AB 2BFC C981 E686 86E3 46D4

On 25.1.2010 18.20, Jacob Godserv wrote:

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty<betelgeuse@gentoo.org> 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
(and can't seem to find a resolution in this thread).



There's already an open bug in Portage and the system set won't be
changed for this.


Regards,
Petteri

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 just trying to
improve things.



I categorize it as user support when trying to explain things that you
can find out in the Portage man pages. I know we don't do a good job at
communicating new things to users but improving that belongs to an
another thread.


Regards,
Petteri

Petteri Räty wrote:

On 25.1.2010 18.20, Jacob Godserv wrote:
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:32, Petteri Räty<betelgeuse@gentoo.org>
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
(and can't seem to find a resolution in this thread).



There's already an open bug in Portage and the system set won't be
changed for this.


Regards,
Petteri




So it's not resolved, there just won't be any changes?

Dale

:-) :-)

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<betelgeuse@gentoo.org>
>>> 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
>>> (and can't seem to find a resolution in this thread).
>>>
>>
>> There's already an open bug in Portage and the system set won't be
>> changed for this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Petteri
>>
>>
>
> So it's not resolved, there just won't be any changes?
>
> Dale
>

There's nothing more to discuss on this mailing list so from the mailing
list stand point the the thread is done. Any implementation details etc
belong to bugzilla.

Regards,
Petteri