Re: [gentoo-dev] Stupid question regarding 'fixpackages'

[Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com>]

On Monday 20 October 2003 20:12, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 10/20/03  Joachim Breuer wrote:
> > Now, my question is: Shouldn't fixpackages 'stabilize', i.e. not
> > perform global updates it has already performed? The way it is now I'd
> > hate to think what an upgrade will be like a year or two from now...
> > If this 'stabilizing' cannot be done I'd like to know for what reason,
> > perhaps I'd want to take a look whether there really isn't an useful
> > optimization.
>
> Well, there are different opinions on that. I'd like to make the
> fixpackages script behave the same way as FEATURES="fixpackages", but
> there is a reason not to do this: the do_upgrade function which actually
> does all the work for fixpackages (and more) maintains a mtime table
> when it runs, but it is run by emerge and fixpackages. The problem now
> is that when do_upgrade runs from emerge without FEATURES="fixpackages"
> it updates the mtime table, that means the information would be wrong
> for fixpackages. I guess in the end we will have to add another mtime
> table for fixpackages to fix this issue.

I hate to sound lame, but I'm not sure I followed that correclty. fixpackages, 
when called using FEATURES, only fixes the packages that the emerge process 
touches? And, when calling fixpackages directly, it processes all packages? 
Is that correct? If not, can you please explaing the difference between the 
two?

Regards,
Jason

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list