[gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[Mark David Dumlao]

I used to think that eix did that.

After eixing back and forth for some non-existent
app-office/{kugar,koshell,kexi} (wouldn't show up on my eixes) that
was holding back my --depcleans of kdelibs:3.5 and
koffice-{libs,data}:3.5, then doubling back on the manual page, I
discovered it didn't :D

Is there an option or filter I could pass to qlist to find out which
packages are installed but not in the portage tree(s)? The qlist -ICv
suggestion from the eix man page only shows all installed packages. My
goal is to either remove them or put them in the local overlay.
-- 
This email is:    [ ] actionable   [ ] fyi        [ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes          [x] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate    [ ] soon       [x] none

Re: [gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[Dale]

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> I used to think that eix did that.
>
> After eixing back and forth for some non-existent
> app-office/{kugar,koshell,kexi} (wouldn't show up on my eixes) that
> was holding back my --depcleans of kdelibs:3.5 and
> koffice-{libs,data}:3.5, then doubling back on the manual page, I
> discovered it didn't :D
>
> Is there an option or filter I could pass to qlist to find out which
> packages are installed but not in the portage tree(s)? The qlist -ICv
> suggestion from the eix man page only shows all installed packages. My
> goal is to either remove them or put them in the local overlay.
>    

I think "eix-test-obsolete -d" will do that.  I don't have any installed 
that are not in portage at the moment so I can't test it to be sure.

Be warned, this thing can output a LOT of stuff.  If you are in a 
console, you may want to pipe to a text file or to less or something.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[Mark David Dumlao]

Just what I needed. Thanks!

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>
>> I used to think that eix did that.
>>
>> After eixing back and forth for some non-existent
>> app-office/{kugar,koshell,kexi} (wouldn't show up on my eixes) that
>> was holding back my --depcleans of kdelibs:3.5 and
>> koffice-{libs,data}:3.5, then doubling back on the manual page, I
>> discovered it didn't :D
>>
>> Is there an option or filter I could pass to qlist to find out which
>> packages are installed but not in the portage tree(s)? The qlist -ICv
>> suggestion from the eix man page only shows all installed packages. My
>> goal is to either remove them or put them in the local overlay.
>>
>
> I think "eix-test-obsolete -d" will do that.  I don't have any installed
> that are not in portage at the moment so I can't test it to be sure.
>
> Be warned, this thing can output a LOT of stuff.  If you are in a console,
> you may want to pipe to a text file or to less or something.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>



-- 
This email is:    [ ] actionable   [ ] fyi        [ ] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes          [ ] up to you  [ ] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate    [ ] soon       [ ] none

Re: [gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[Dale]

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> Just what I needed. Thanks!
>
>    

Let me also add that the output has changed.  I tried to clean up some 
package.* files a while back and it turned into a mess.  Before you 
change a file, make a backup just in case.  It seems to list some things 
that maybe it shouldn't.  Maybe I am missing something somewhere but it 
isn't the way it used to be.  I need to run it and just sit and study 
the list and test some things.  There may be some rhyme or reason for 
what it is doing that I just don't see yet

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[Mark David Dumlao]

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>
>> Just what I needed. Thanks!
>>
>>
>
> Let me also add that the output has changed.  I tried to clean up some
> package.* files a while back and it turned into a mess.  Before you change a
> file, make a backup just in case.  It seems to list some things that maybe
> it shouldn't.  Maybe I am missing something somewhere but it isn't the way
> it used to be.  I need to run it and just sit and study the list and test
> some things.  There may be some rhyme or reason for what it is doing that I
> just don't see yet

Fear not, the redundant / missing flags in my package.xxx files are
more of an out-of-sight, out-of-mind thing for me. I figure they're
not breaking anything nor adding that much cruft by just being there.
Crufty packages though, bug me, especially when they block my
upgrades/revdeps/uninstalls.

-- 
This email is:    [ ] actionable   [ ] fyi        [x] social
Response needed:  [ ] yes          [ ] up to you  [x] no
Time-sensitive:   [ ] immediate    [ ] soon       [x] none

Re: [gentoo-user] Showing installed packages that aren't in portage tree(s)

[Dale]

chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 2:19 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:
>>      
>>> Just what I needed. Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> Let me also add that the output has changed.  I tried to clean up some
>> package.* files a while back and it turned into a mess.  Before you change a
>> file, make a backup just in case.  It seems to list some things that maybe
>> it shouldn't.  Maybe I am missing something somewhere but it isn't the way
>> it used to be.  I need to run it and just sit and study the list and test
>> some things.  There may be some rhyme or reason for what it is doing that I
>> just don't see yet
>>      
> Fear not, the redundant / missing flags in my package.xxx files are
> more of an out-of-sight, out-of-mind thing for me. I figure they're
> not breaking anything nor adding that much cruft by just being there.
> Crufty packages though, bug me, especially when they block my
> upgrades/revdeps/uninstalls.
>
>    

True but I try to keep mine up to date and clean.  It's just me.  It may 
not matter much right now but it may one day.  If I let it build up, 
then it will be harder to fix later.

I'm weird tho.  Everyone knows it and I accept it.  lol

Dale

:-)  :-)