[gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[Jason Stubbs]

Hello all,

I pruned my world file to include only the software I want and then ran 
"emerge -p depclean" to find that nano appeared on the list. I added it to my 
world file and have cleared out old software. However, checking 
/etc/make.profile/packages, I find that nano has in fact been removed. In 
fact, there isn't any editor listed as part of the base system. Is this 
correct?

Regards,
Jason

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[Marius Mauch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 752 bytes --]

On 09/08/03  Jason Stubbs wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> I pruned my world file to include only the software I want and then
> ran "emerge -p depclean" to find that nano appeared on the list. I
> added it to my world file and have cleared out old software. However,
> checking /etc/make.profile/packages, I find that nano has in fact been
> removed. In fact, there isn't any editor listed as part of the base
> system. Is this correct?

There is a virtual/editor so you can use another editor than nano in
system. All editors should provide virtual/editor.

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[Jason Stubbs]

On Monday 08 September 2003 10:15, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 09/08/03  Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I pruned my world file to include only the software I want and then
> > ran "emerge -p depclean" to find that nano appeared on the list. I
> > added it to my world file and have cleared out old software. However,
> > checking /etc/make.profile/packages, I find that nano has in fact been
> > removed. In fact, there isn't any editor listed as part of the base
> > system. Is this correct?
>
> There is a virtual/editor so you can use another editor than nano in
> system. All editors should provide virtual/editor.

Ahhh.. So because something I have installed depends on app-editors/emacs, 
that did not get removed and because app-editors/nano was not in the world 
file and virtual/editor was already fulfilled by app-editors/emacs, depclean 
was happy to get rid of it.

In that case, is app-editors/nano in the world file on a new setup? If not, 
should it be?

Regards,
Jason

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 858 bytes --]

On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 03:15, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 09/08/03  Jason Stubbs wrote:
> 
> > Hello all,
> > 
> > I pruned my world file to include only the software I want and then
> > ran "emerge -p depclean" to find that nano appeared on the list. I
> > added it to my world file and have cleared out old software. However,
> > checking /etc/make.profile/packages, I find that nano has in fact been
> > removed. In fact, there isn't any editor listed as part of the base
> > system. Is this correct?
> 
> There is a virtual/editor so you can use another editor than nano in
> system. All editors should provide virtual/editor.
> 

And after you specifically merged nano, or whatever, it will anyhow
get into the world file ...


-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 10:08:23 +0900
Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com> wrote:


> However, checking /etc/make.profile/packages, I find that nano has in
> fact been removed. In  fact, there isn't any editor listed as part of
> the base system. Is this  correct?
> 

Nope. thats incorrect. :
*virtual/editor 
is listed in packages, which will be satisfied by any editor providing
just that. "editor" 

and the virtuals file gives:
virtual/editor                  app-editors/nano
that nano is the default editor if no other is installed.


//Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] nano removed from system?

[Jason Stubbs]

On Monday 08 September 2003 10:27, Spider wrote:
> begin  quote
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 10:08:23 +0900
>
> Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com> wrote:
> > However, checking /etc/make.profile/packages, I find that nano has in
> > fact been removed. In  fact, there isn't any editor listed as part of
> > the base system. Is this  correct?
>
> Nope. thats incorrect. :
> *virtual/editor
> is listed in packages, which will be satisfied by any editor providing
> just that. "editor"
>
> and the virtuals file gives:
> virtual/editor                  app-editors/nano
> that nano is the default editor if no other is installed.

Well, I've confirmed that this is the case on my system. However...

As I said in my other post, app-editors/xemacs is installed due to something 
depending on it. It seems that because xemacs is installed and necessary and 
nano is installed but not in the world file, depclean wants to get rid of 
nano. This seems like normal correct behaviour to me.

What I was wondering about was whether nano should be listed in the world file 
on a fresh installation. All the other virtuals that get satisfied during 
installation are installed manually, no? Perhaps an editor should be 
installed manually as well... BTW this not a vi vs. nano type question ;-)

Regards,
Jason

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list