From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759D61381F3 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:37:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C2860E09B2; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:36:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 224E4E09B1 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:36:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C5A33E263 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:36:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.821 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.821 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.749, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.07, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5pEFZ0wJjN9o for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:36:51 +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 2960133E215 for ; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:36:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UieUd-0000Qx-1V for gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:36:43 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:36:43 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:36:43 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] Is portage (/usr)/bin-merge safe? Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 05:36:28 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: 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=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT b00f96e /usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2) X-Archives-Salt: 57f9e4d4-7f4f-4e56-9fd2-33f25d82526d X-Archives-Hash: 7b8bab8c6b983f6a239cd267a8ab0d0a As in subject, is portage bin/usr-bin merge safe? It appears most of my clashing files are /usr/bin/* -> /bin/* symlinks. (That's just bin, I've not looked at sbin.) Does portage "just do the right thing" if the dirs are linked to each other? Meanwhile, a quick eyeball of the results says 50-60% of the hits are coreutils, so if portage doesn't handle it automatically, fixing it for just that one package, even just using a USE flag instead of trying to detect it automatically, would kill a majority of the birds with a single stone. (Since I don't have a separate /usr anyway, I've been thinking about it... If it's not easily doable anyway, that cuts short the internal debate.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman