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 <gentoo-user+bounces-133110-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Rhegt-0000q3-TV
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 10:00:28 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F72C21C123;
Mon, 2 Jan 2012 10:00:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4350821C0B4
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 2 Jan 2012 09:58:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id m12so9020044wer.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 01:58:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization
:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=ozSTohGFwTJHQVDv6k7f+JQnurP5vZ5z58ocOz6Xduo=;
b=a92ph7U9E/KqnbXuLwH5rDviKGIf/BxC2hjN/ykAz3vSGKkcbRzgTWhKC1J0iwM7NN
8K0W9O07rqc86W7zS6MC9jl8/4bJlu/m+2fTYm/6uTNyP62/BfotgicGcx6oB07uvrgi
Q8hclsE+nX6gZURSYP5s+WMHweRDOJzlPK820=
Received: by 10.216.135.75 with SMTP id t53mr26708702wei.2.1325498301919;
Mon, 02 Jan 2012 01:58:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rohan.example.com (196-215-2-107.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.215.2.107])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q5sm1156449wbo.8.2012.01.02.01.58.19
(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Mon, 02 Jan 2012 01:58:20 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 11:58:09 +0200
From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update behavior
Message-ID: <20120102115809.5259d3cf@rohan.example.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F00DA52.1060504@gmail.com>
References: <4F00D521.1030702@orlitzky.com>
<4F00DA52.1060504@gmail.com>
Organization: Internet Solutions
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: d25512df-7e36-4b22-aa9a-f474e4fe652c
X-Archives-Hash: 0130781a2b5d741ccd955852773b6ba1
On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 16:12:34 -0600
Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > Using "emerge --update foo" adds "foo" to your world file. This is
> > responsible for pretty much every package that incorrectly found
> > its way into one of my world files.
> >
> > Is there any reason to desire the current behavior? I'd like to
> > suggest that it be fixed, but want to be sure I'm not just being
> > short-sighted.
> >
> >
>
> We noticed that a while back too. I added --oneshot to my make.conf
> setting to prevent this. When you want something added to the world
> file, check into the --select option. I'm pretty sure that is the
> one.
>
> I do agree that updates shouldn't add things to the world file but I
> wouldn't hold my breath on it getting changed.
The current behaviour is the correct and expected one - you told
portage to emerge something and it did. Why else would you emerge
something if you didn't intend it to become a permanent feature of the
system and part of world? This has always been the definition of emerge
- to make it permanent.
If you want to emerge something and NOT have portage put it in world
then you must use the -1 option. Remember that emerging something is
supposed to be a permanent action that you (as root) intended to
happen. If what you intend is something more unusual like a mere test
or "just to see what would happen" then you must take additional steps
(to make it clear that you are doing something out of the ordinary).
It's the same logic as rm uses:
the user told the computer to delete a file so the computer did what it
was told by it's master and deleted the file. What else would you
expect it to do?
p.s. before I forget: Happy New Year :-)
--
Alan McKinnnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com