From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE555139694 for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 01:10:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 26F3E2740F4; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 01:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wr0-x242.google.com (mail-wr0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCE33E0C5C for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 01:10:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr0-x242.google.com with SMTP id k67so28544387wrc.1 for ; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 18:10:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=9ZTJJBljZlhVI3hV3S5nL7I7lu0jhSRT4ex6te17GbU=; b=XPcsomc91O0AbXTpATdWY5fRxDgN398vnj+UivQIaDXlH97EL7et8Vxrv55euvJktc Ua15bfuIFlfo+sSB+jaUzcvIL1H8ieLsrhDlgdww17p9+HcSusUx0Z79/vuOSRUqxUNa 7eX/hP94n/X8hKQOC8qJHlAPbftrrih8Vhe8NR1y7Q5K3KArCE+0979DDR1H3RvD+7z3 t6GYJJ35clJrrkM7JLcVmAqcxiEqN0Y5VvaAT+DqgFxPPNDSxDkO+KuCbZSlMl4Ay50b cAKyRcha1CRpHc8ZijV4nK6JJsB3DVAg+yut5KZOTHwX/rPpEoyR1PuezybyihPHoAn5 TIlA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9ZTJJBljZlhVI3hV3S5nL7I7lu0jhSRT4ex6te17GbU=; b=cWSFhs/Xk/F1McZAs+IB/w9Bxojqrg/474yy2p3Qzza9J2Gc5op95r1A+5hLeowENV 9zw+UHoMjpa5g79l16Hjb1MLr7vlJrCnW4dt+WQcLvCV/ug2UgVZtIi4Bu6qNTHvogSn WwxV4LvoKrAYCDF5R1GglLdu/ATbnnenxCfGUtlAOAIzUgKHMuV5Clel/FnxPmitnkMQ hTDd/1tPH3ZMN2v20CJIs2VqkSq79wPs2pCXgKOLRWJsvXOcvmrtn67lkEAaue700oPC pkQr7MzpJkK6dVQzZt4Qr4cVYYc5WUheQtpaPU5bZgDmyNN+BjFMfg8bBACw3Tj9bqMe neDQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw110O1yV8O0LxNo+vzAlsHCxD33c3TsPrS8vWtlkDk8CeHVxnVvQT PSu2mfmfvca9UKIm X-Received: by 10.223.175.238 with SMTP id y46mr8307119wrd.163.1499735410388; Mon, 10 Jul 2017 18:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snowblower (cpc4-broo7-2-0-cust35.14-2.cable.virginm.net. [82.8.215.36]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f21sm17078434wra.5.2017.07.10.18.10.09 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 Jul 2017 18:10:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 02:10:06 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Sets vs Meta ebuilds Message-ID: <20170711021006.2146f24c@snowblower> In-Reply-To: <8f546b5b-3a36-b903-1faf-709bc96cab49@gentoo.org> References: <20170710013711.GA8455@waltdnes.org> <79e987ff-dbcc-0fac-3458-df39973d3630@gentoo.org> <8f546b5b-3a36-b903-1faf-709bc96cab49@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.0 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: bcb3f8e6-cb5b-4775-a8f7-50fe378c179d X-Archives-Hash: d5c0c85c8174d3b92402a9352a5e29bf On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 17:21:42 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 10/07/17 04:47 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:36:11 -0500 > > Ben Kohler wrote: > >> > >> If you want dependencies checked, use the correct option which > >> checks them. This takes significantly longer than -C, as it's > >> significantly more complex to check for. > >> > >> As far as I can tell, you are literally asking for -C to behave > >> like -c, when you could just be using -c instead. > > > > No I simply want warnings like that exist for profiles and set > > packages. > > > > Also more information when attempting to remove a package that is > > not removed. > > > > OK, well, as Ben said it's not feasible to make -C act like -c due to > the performance hit involved and due to the purpose of the command > itself. Have you profiled this? It shouldn't be slow if implemented correctly. -- Ciaran McCreesh