public inbox for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: emailgrant@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] System maintenance procedure?
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 22:06:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121208220616.44fb92ae@khamul.example.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN0CFw1wYJ9rUA41YFk0Yc=1hQqO-5DbYPo5VNOiJQ2J697AfA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 16:56:18 -0800
Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > My unattended daily system maintenance procedure is like this:
> > >
> > > layman -S
> > > emerge --sync
> > > emerge -pvDuN world
> > > emerge -pv --depclean
> > > eclean -p distfiles
> > > eclean -p packages
> > >
> > > And then attended like this:
> > >
> > >
> > > revdep-rebuild
> > > etc-update
> > > elogv
> > > emerge --depclean
> > > eclean distfiles
> > > eclean packages
> > >
> > > Am I missing any good stuff?
> > >
> > > - Grant
> >
> >
> > I'd tweak the order of your attended run:
> >
> > emerge -DuN world
> > emerge @preserved-rebuild
> > emerge --depclean
> > revdep-rebuild
> >
> >
> > The logic is:
> >
> > Rebuild busted packages that portage already knows about
> > (@preserved-rebuild), then get rid of oudated packages and finally
> > revdep-rebuild to fix anything that --depclean broke.
> >
> > @preserved-rebuild is getting very good at what it does lately
> > (supported in all recent portage version including stable IIRC), as
> > is --depclean, so revdep-rebuild seldom finds anything to do these
> > days.
> >
> > --
> > Alan McKinnon
> 
> If revdep-rebuild does everything that @preserved-rebuild does and
> more, why run @preserved-rebuild at all?

@preserved-rebuild does it correctly, does not break your system and
does not leave it in an indeterminate state while you spend hours
trying to figure out what went on.

revdep-rebuild does all those things (and also gets around to fixing
broken libs while taking it's own sweet time to do it).

So they are not really the same thing at all.

Basically, portage removes old .so files when doing upgrades. If the
so-name changes, packages using that file are now broken.
revdep-rebuild was a phase 1 effort to repair that damage after the
fact, and it was good at that.

@preserved-rebuild is a feature in portage that won't remove old .so
files until the last binary linking to it is removed. IOW, things still
work meanwhile. It's analogous to the Unix style of deleting files - if
you app still has a handle to a file and the file is deleted, your app
does not notice the difference as from it's POV the delete has not
happened yet


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com



  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-12-08 20:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-05  0:30 [gentoo-user] System maintenance procedure? Grant
2012-12-05  1:00 ` nybblenybblebyte
2012-12-05  1:21 ` Dale
2012-12-05  3:55   ` Grant
2012-12-05  1:36 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-05  4:04   ` Grant
2012-12-05  4:34     ` Dale
2012-12-05  5:15       ` Grant
2012-12-05 10:22         ` Dale
2012-12-08  0:57           ` Grant
2012-12-08 22:04       ` Grant
2012-12-08 23:25         ` Dale
2012-12-15  3:38         ` Grant
2012-12-05 12:50     ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-08  0:55       ` Grant
2012-12-05  3:15 ` Pandu Poluan
2012-12-05  3:29   ` Allan Gottlieb
2012-12-05  3:34   ` Dale
2012-12-05 10:05 ` Alan McKinnon
2012-12-08  0:56   ` Grant
2012-12-08 11:58     ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-08 20:06     ` Alan McKinnon [this message]
2012-12-08 21:07       ` Grant
2012-12-08 21:25         ` Alan McKinnon
2012-12-08 21:54           ` Grant
2012-12-08 22:08             ` Alan McKinnon
2012-12-09  0:41               ` Grant
2012-12-08 22:49             ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-08 23:20               ` Dale
2012-12-09  4:22                 ` Dale
2012-12-09 13:18                 ` Bruce Hill
2012-12-09 16:48                   ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-09 17:01                     ` Bruce Hill
2012-12-09 19:06                       ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-11 13:36                     ` Bruce Hill
2012-12-11 14:04                       ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-11 17:20                       ` Michael Orlitzky
2012-12-12  6:05                       ` Alan McKinnon
2012-12-12  9:29                         ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-12 15:10                         ` Bruce Hill
2012-12-12  9:49                       ` Neil Bothwick
2012-12-12 12:16                         ` design [depois das dez]
2012-12-09  0:33               ` Peter Humphrey
2012-12-10  7:50 ` Daniel Wagener
2012-12-10  8:41 ` [gentoo-user] " Steven J. Long

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20121208220616.44fb92ae@khamul.example.com \
    --to=alan.mckinnon@gmail.com \
    --cc=emailgrant@gmail.com \
    --cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox