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 1QU6T7-0001zI-De for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 00:17:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1B8411C02B; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 00:16:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56641C02B for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 00:16:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so10686wwj.10 for ; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:16:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references :in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :message-id; bh=4+GZYLhNwUE+hI6avx5awKjxvbmrGNcgPj0A+G8vXLk=; b=BKhCAmmZL4E+Rszl/bvdwuPCS9arPIoSHvFWLJIeeky7QufW4UUyiRGXSv0QanNp1z cYBybyWeN2ar3IvQXCzHLt+ovNIGaxnmdjyEPik4T/uVJbZyKuUduZPqr4bnK2T8nali LEgeCVa9xBwNobDQxKVQsLyERo8qfIOYaN2FU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=kI8N1dHlpNeZTblAuvVZ5rHyL8moP/YmmeXb7vBqfPWTQMMyKua2ZocwDM4oxCUZUI m0bbK0p11g2R0kj+1q+JbsMOJ9eBMVkcV52IPdYLo4GB2wRq4C6tEhL69gT7Y33S91Ig cmU2+TyrKeDf6NDPZo3/Hy0kRaPbCaHboHpCo= Received: by 10.216.79.11 with SMTP id h11mr6447770wee.77.1307492188820; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:16:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet (196-210-183-215.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.183.215]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z66sm3150551weq.0.2011.06.07.17.16.26 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 07 Jun 2011 17:16:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2.0_alpha38 & --depclean Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 02:15:53 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.39-ck; KDE/4.6.3; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Dale References: <201106071110.25887.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <201106080154.52763.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <4DEEBC49.6080004@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4DEEBC49.6080004@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201106080215.53872.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 76bce213815d358bf1ec8f29c305e805 Apparently, though unproven, at 02:03 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Dale did opine thusly: > Alan McKinnon wrote: > > Apparently, though unproven, at 01:08 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Walter > > Dnes > > > > did opine thusly: > >> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote > >> > >>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon > > > > wrote: > >>>> Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and > >>>> depclean handling. It now shows this: > >>>> > >>>> !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile. > >>>> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system. > >>> > >>> I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano& less to my world > >>> file just so I could move on. > >>> > >> Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting > >> > >> vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it? > > > > y'know, now that you mention it: > > > > $ eix -e editor > > [I] virtual/editor > > > > Available versions: 0{tbz2} > > Installed versions: 0{tbz2}(12:10:07 10/06/10) > > Description: Virtual for editor > > > > $ genlop -t editor > > > > * virtual/editor > > > > Mon Aug 4 02:31:59 2008>>> virtual/editor-0 > > > > merge time: 3 seconds. > > > > I think the answer is "Yes" > > > > :-) > > > > the virtual satisfies something like 27 different editors > > Then why didn't they do it that way? Require a editor but let the user > pick which one and it be part of the system set. Maybe I am missing > something here. It wouldn't be the first time. ;-) Yes, you are missing something - what you say is exactly how they now do it. Previously nano was explicitly in system - set by profile. Now it's the virtual. iow, pick the one you want. This change could only happen now as to do it Zac needed GLEP 37 satisfied properly -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com