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 1N2TtK-0002qO-Ip for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:02:11 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A9288E0825; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:01:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bw0-f223.google.com (mail-bw0-f223.google.com [209.85.218.223]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7BBE0825 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:01:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz23 with SMTP id 23so2412866bwz.29 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UihYxtiOyXZBaWrr/JfJyHtjG3cKn7uyKN6yp54xqS8=; b=g/a3THX4smDWcd5CUVSSpC/8Y7/maZXBPS2QnZ+TX1ecW12YpRMUmM7IKxpMtNoZEz wcWM3N6IaacCUP5lV0bg+JT9kg683mWzmGtm7LiyxI47P8XLHB0Pd4NaSTuxLTxXlPj7 SO5MJhHX0/rMh/YXX/F/9fkJAmi4vAU4NSmLk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=v9Q5IvK2jzuqQaTaoqODybl1yN6LDcCkIi27oI8hU5Q26pkhGiLvJyHQy6vprvED4v m2VTcYbV8Jf7XkZe29ppUSE29myMAcFqbyx1aVUnRYASbrxTCrs8cdAX841UsMYLXZSj 7Xi2AhBfFL/PyRCGzn1wuv/Ba6KCBnIVwvxiw= Received: by 10.204.153.24 with SMTP id i24mr11030420bkw.114.1256580117682; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com (c-24-130-139-50.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.139.50]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 28sm556645fkx.31.2009.10.26.11.01.54 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:52 -0700 Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:52 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: fuzzyray@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] REVDEP-REBUILD and emerge default options Message-ID: <20091026180152.GC917@hrair.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> References: <1256579675.32368.14.camel@txslpc1d36.wkst.vzwnet.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1256579675.32368.14.camel@txslpc1d36.wkst.vzwnet.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: e5bb23d1-dc66-4da0-a2eb-e1a784b7bb31 X-Archives-Hash: da0bce07d4918a294e92a55e39762caf On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:54:35PM -0500, Paul Varner wrote: > I am very much against allowing EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS in revdep-rebuild > since I went through hell trying to support it when it was first added > as a feature to portage and I really don't want to go through that > again. Just out of curiousity, did you try a blacklist or a whitelist approach? ~brian