From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SEMgI-0005aw-NY for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 15:27:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5D5A2E0C7E; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 15:26:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3191EE0C5E for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 15:25:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9B751B4018 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 15:25:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.269 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.269 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.479, BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.164, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dewcH1991YGT for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 15:25:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3559A1B4011 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 15:25:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SEMei-0007xY-Lm for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:25:24 +0200 Received: from 82.153.101.33 ([82.153.101.33]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:25:24 +0200 Received: from slong by 82.153.101.33 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 17:25:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steven J Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: About suggesting to create a separate partition for portage tree in handbook Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 16:28:15 +0100 Organization: Friendly-Coders Message-ID: References: <20337.28987.736877.961717@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120327154239.GA17394@gentoo.org> <1332870540.18466.9.camel@belkin4> <20120327180158.GA1468@siphos.be> <1332873243.11827.15.camel@rook> <20120327200532.GA15040@thinkpad.rutgers.edu> <1333094778.1407.9.camel@belkin4> <20120331084402.GA23183@gentoo.org> <1333200867.29219.2.camel@belkin4> <4F77421A.9030306@gentoo.org> <20120331232508.GA18617@waltdnes.org> 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="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.153.101.33 X-Archives-Salt: 1a84eac2-1014-4639-9009-825fdf647516 X-Archives-Hash: 27184bab55d723448d59c4bebde563f5 Walter Dnes wrote: > I've also cobbled together my > own "autodepclean" script that check for, and optionally unmerges > unneeded stuff that was pulled in as a dependancy of a package that has > since been removed. > What advantage does it have over a standard --depclean? -- #friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)