[gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Graham Murray]

Following a portage update/sync and running 'emerge -auDvN world',
packages sometimes show with 'R' but without any yellow or % USE flags
shown. I assume that this is because a USE flag has been removed from
either the ebuild or an eclass used by the ebuild. If this is correct,
it would be nice if it was to show which USE flag(s) are no longer
used. 
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Alan Mckinnon]

On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 13:21 +0100, Graham Murray wrote:
> Following a portage update/sync and running 'emerge -auDvN world',
> packages sometimes show with 'R' but without any yellow or % USE flags
> shown. I assume that this is because a USE flag has been removed from
> either the ebuild or an eclass used by the ebuild. If this is correct,
> it would be nice if it was to show which USE flag(s) are no longer
> used. 

Now there's an idea, why didn't I think of that? Submit it as a feature
request, I'll give you a "me too!" vote

alan

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Willie Wong]

On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 03:51:47PM +0200, Penguin Lover Alan Mckinnon squawked:
> On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 13:21 +0100, Graham Murray wrote:
> > Following a portage update/sync and running 'emerge -auDvN world',
> > packages sometimes show with 'R' but without any yellow or % USE flags
> > shown. I assume that this is because a USE flag has been removed from
> > either the ebuild or an eclass used by the ebuild. If this is correct,
> > it would be nice if it was to show which USE flag(s) are no longer
> > used. 
> 
> Now there's an idea, why didn't I think of that? Submit it as a feature
> request, I'll give you a "me too!" vote

That would be a neat idea. But I don't think that's what the OP
described. Packages shown with R implies it is being re-compiled.
yellow or % USE flags are new ones. If you have already installed the
package once, the USE flags cannot be new ;)

I would think that if IUSE changed in an ebuild, that would warrant a
version bump, but I don't know the dev's policy on that. 

Most likely those packages are being re-merged because of a changed
USE flag on your configuration: does it have something green or
followed by *? That means a USE flag that changed since the last
install.

HTH,

W
-- 
"Fortunately, this is where we stop, for the equations of motion are 2nd order. 
If it were 5th order you'd all probably switch to biology."
~DeathMech, S. Sondhi. P-town PHY 205
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 1 day, 20:03
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 901 bytes --]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 11:11:57 -0400, Willie Wong wrote:

> That would be a neat idea. But I don't think that's what the OP
> described. Packages shown with R implies it is being re-compiled.
> yellow or % USE flags are new ones. If you have already installed the
> package once, the USE flags cannot be new ;)

They can if the ebuild has changed, but new flags would be highlighted.
What is happening here is that flags have been removed, and portage
currently does not highlight those. I think the feature request is a god
idea. Post the bug number and I'll add my vote.

> I would think that if IUSE changed in an ebuild, that would warrant a
> version bump, but I don't know the dev's policy on that. 

Ebuild fixes and other general tidying up that do not alter the installed
code do not get a revision bump.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Help put the "fun" back in "dysfunctional" !

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Willie Wong]

On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 04:28:48PM +0100, Penguin Lover Neil Bothwick squawked:
> > I would think that if IUSE changed in an ebuild, that would warrant a
> > version bump, but I don't know the dev's policy on that. 
> 
> Ebuild fixes and other general tidying up that do not alter the installed
> code do not get a revision bump.

Ah, thanks for the clarification. But wouldn't changing the USE
variables change (pull in) dependencies and linked libraries? Or am I
misunderstanding what is meant by installed code?

W
-- 
I just got a physical and asked, "Well Doc, how do I stand?"
He said, "That's what is puzzling me."
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 1 day, 21:27
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 689 bytes --]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:34:45 -0400, Willie Wong wrote:

> > Ebuild fixes and other general tidying up that do not alter the
> > installed code do not get a revision bump.  
> 
> Ah, thanks for the clarification. But wouldn't changing the USE
> variables change (pull in) dependencies and linked libraries? Or am I
> misunderstanding what is meant by installed code?

It looks like in this case, they are removing USE flags that are now
redundant, which wouldn't change the code. Adding compile features
certainly would.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

WinErr 103: Error buffer overflow - Too many errors encountered.
            Additional errors may not be displayed or recorded.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Packages being Re-emerged after portage update

[Willie Wong]

On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 06:20:36PM +0100, Penguin Lover Neil Bothwick squawked:
> > Ah, thanks for the clarification. But wouldn't changing the USE
> > variables change (pull in) dependencies and linked libraries? Or am I
> > misunderstanding what is meant by installed code?
> 
> It looks like in this case, they are removing USE flags that are now
> redundant, which wouldn't change the code. Adding compile features
> certainly would.

I see. 

Just a thought: the addition of USE flags allow the setting of
optional dependencies or compile time options. So if a USE flag is
added, and the user is unaware of such, it might cause some problem or
inconveniences cough*eds*cough. 

If a USE flag is removed, presumeably it is because
  1) The *optional* stuff it used to specify is no longer optional. 
  2) The flag is replaced by another of a different name or more
  specific distinction (qt by qt3/4). 
In either case, it wouldn't really bite the user per se (case 2 being
taken care of by portage letting us know when new flags are
available). 

As far as I can see, the only downside to removed USE flags is the
cruft it sometimes generates. (This is not to say I won't welcome the
new feature being proposed, I am just thinking out loud here.)

Is there anything I missed? Perhaps an important reason why removed
USE flags would be undesireable in make.conf or package.use?

W

-- 
Tussman's Law:
  Nothing is as inevitable as a mistake whose time has come.
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 1 day, 22:37
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list