* [gentoo-user] Re: portage inconsistency?
@ 2007-08-06 10:40 99% ` Remy Blank
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Remy Blank @ 2007-08-06 10:40 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 827 bytes --]
Abraham Marín Pérez wrote:
> That is indeed true, however, it will always be better keeping things
> right than breaking and fixing as a rule, don't you think?
The thing is, you will *have to* break things at some point anyway. In
your case, it will be when you decide to update LIB (because you want to
have the new features, or because another package needs the new
version). Between the LIB update and the APP recompilation, APP will be
broken.
Even worse, if you don't know that the LIB update will break APP, you
might not notice immediately that APP is broken, or you might only get
some strange results from APP. That's where revdep-rebuild steps in: it
can tell you that APP is broken, and what's needed to fix it. So you're
better off running it consistently after your regular updates.
-- Remy
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 187 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2007-07-16 22:46 [gentoo-user] portage inconsistency? maxim wexler
2007-08-05 14:32 ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2007-08-06 8:45 ` Abraham Marín Pérez
2007-08-06 9:11 ` [gentoo-user] " Remy Blank
2007-08-06 9:59 ` Abraham Marín Pérez
2007-08-06 10:40 99% ` Remy Blank
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox