* [gentoo-user] Re: portage inconsistency?
@ 2007-08-06 9:11 99% ` Remy Blank
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Remy Blank @ 2007-08-06 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 602 bytes --]
Abraham Marín Pérez wrote:
> Now think there's a new version available of LIB, let's say version 2.1,
> but the latest version of APP is still 1.0. If portage performed a deep
> update by default LIB would be rebuilt, but no APP, what would cause
> broken dependencies on APP (remember LIB is a dynamic library). However,
> is you don't update LIB unless you update also APP you will prevent this
> problem*.
That's what revdep-rebuild is for. Update your LIB, run revdep-rebuild,
and if APP is really broken by the LIB update (it doesn't have to be),
it will be rebuilt.
-- 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 99% ` [gentoo-user] " Remy Blank
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox