From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Fxp5X-0001aG-8D for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 17:53:31 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k64Hpilg012185; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 17:51:44 GMT Received: from sas4.stonline.sk (sas4.t-com.sk [213.81.152.137]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k64HixXF030693 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 17:44:59 GMT Received: from av3.stonline.sk ([192.168.133.65]) by sas4.stonline.sk (8.13.6/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k64Hixf3003248 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 19:44:59 +0200 Received: from smtp.t-com.sk (av-4 [192.168.172.141]) by av3.stonline.sk (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k64Hixgi003243 for ; Tue, 4 Jul 2006 19:44:59 +0200 X-Virus-Scanner: This message was checked by NOD32 Antivirus system NOD32 for Linux Mail Server. For more information on NOD32 Antivirus System, please, visit our website: http://www.nod32.com/. Received: from amit.kihnet.sk (adsl-d58.87-197-128.telecom.sk [87.197.128.58]) by smtp2.stonline.sk (STOnline ESMTP Server) with ESMTPA id <0J1W00B6P3YYYL@smtp2.stonline.sk> for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 19:44:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: by amit.kihnet.sk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 579BDA50089; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 19:44:57 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 19:44:54 +0200 From: Robert Cernansky Subject: Re[4]: [gentoo-user] xorg-x11 screwup In-reply-to: <1152033099.6231.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: mjlkcher@stonline.sk To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Message-id: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mahogany 0.66.0 'Clio', compiled for Linux 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: INLINE References: <1151881520.517.7.camel@bunyip> <87odw7qmps.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk> <20060704093509.F86E.NICK@rout.co.nz> <1152033099.6231.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Archives-Salt: ec99a5f7-287a-41f3-bb75-d370ac472a96 X-Archives-Hash: 3aad8a1c3be1d7babaae6b5f8c09b449 On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 19:11:39 +0200 Alan McKinnon wrote: AM> On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 18:29 +0200, Robert Cernansky wrote: AM> > AM> > Hmm, it can be done with "garbage collector principe". Each AM> > package will have counter which increases when some package which AM> > depend on AM> > it is installed. Decreased, when the package is uninstalled. If AM> > counter is AM> > zero, "dependency" package can be uninstalled along with package AM> > specified AM> > for uninstalling. AM> AM> No, that still doesn't work. When the user unmerges kde-meta, with your AM> proposal it will unmerge X11. The next step is that the user emerges AM> gnome which first emerges X11 back again. This isn't so bad with a AM> binary distro if the packages are on a CD, but on gentoo it's murder. AM> Yes, you are right. I did not consider this practical issue. AM> The only sane thing to do is to emerge dependencies when required and AM> unmerge only thinks specifically asked for to be unmerged. You can't AM> even reliably prompt the user with a dialog that says "The following AM> dependencies of the package about to be unmerged are needed by no other AM> package. Shall they be unmerged?" because of deep dependencies. AM> Reverse constructing a multi-node tree and applying logic to it is no AM> joke, hence the wise decision to have portage ignore this amazingly AM> efficient bug-injecting process. Yes, its not so easy, i see now. ;-) Like Bo Andresen wrote --depclean is the best way. Robert -- Robert Cernansky E-mail: hslists2@zoznam.sk Jabber: HS@jabber.sk -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list