Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 01:08 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Walter Dnes
did opine thusly:
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon<alan.mckin...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and
depclean handling. It now shows this:
!!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile.
!!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano& less to my world
file just so I could move on.
Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting
vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it?
y'know, now that you mention it:
$ eix -e editor
[I] virtual/editor
Available versions: 0{tbz2}
Installed versions: 0{tbz2}(12:10:07 10/06/10)
Description: Virtual for editor
$ genlop -t editor
* virtual/editor
Mon Aug 4 02:31:59 2008>>> virtual/editor-0
merge time: 3 seconds.
I think the answer is "Yes"
:-)
the virtual satisfies something like 27 different editors
Then why didn't they do it that way? Require a editor but let the user
pick which one and it be part of the system set. Maybe I am missing
something here. It wouldn't be the first time. ;-)
Dale
:-) :-)
