From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L0OQy-0001n6-Av for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:36 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8812EE060D; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56366E060C for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B5764471 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.452 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.452 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.147, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4M9o3KopnOIQ for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5AA6456E for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L0OQj-0001nl-Gm for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:21 +0000 Received: from c-98-215-178-6.hsd1.in.comcast.net ([98.215.178.6]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:21 +0000 Received: from reader by c-98-215-178-6.hsd1.in.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2008 22:43:21 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Harry Putnam Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Is equery depends still viable Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:43:14 -0600 Organization: Still searching... Message-ID: <87abc4mupp.fsf@newsguy.com> References: <87prl0n21n.fsf@newsguy.com> <200811122312.32111.alan.mckinnon@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=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-215-178-6.hsd1.in.comcast.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:401WmRQhbPuS8GUFPGK/GF0MUy8= Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: ff64b652-67f6-4e14-b84b-b2227bba0493 X-Archives-Hash: 58938c4bc545ba04fbaa0783de39f44b Alan McKinnon writes: > On Wednesday 12 November 2008 22:04:52 Harry Putnam wrote: >> With recent changes in portage in the last few mnths, is equery in >> general and `equery depends' in particular still reliable? > > I use it fairly often still, but do notice I get a lot of null > output. So I no longer trust it fully. At least it doesn't give > false positives - what's in the putput really is a valid depend. Do you know off hand if there are any alternatives?