Apparently, though unproven, at 02:03 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Dale did
opine thusly:
> 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. ;-)
Yes, you are missing something - what you say is exactly how they now do it.
Previously nano was explicitly in system - set by profile. Now it's the
virtual. iow, pick the one you want.
This change could only happen now as to do it Zac needed GLEP 37 satisfied
properly
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
