On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 09:41:10 +0100 Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 07:21:01 +0200, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: > > > Besides there is such database now - it is your (abused) > > package.use! You have to manually add entries to it and I do not > > know any database slower than human typing to a text file ;-) > > (There is autounmask option of course but then you allow portage to > > mess with your files which is not a good thing.) > > Portage doesn't change your package.use file, it creates a new one > using the standard CONFIG_PROTECT process. Then you use etc-update or > similar to view and verify the changes. What I am trying to tell is that portage manages its stuff (USE dependencies), through you, in your configuration files. It is nice that it does not overwrite them directly without asking ;-) but in the end the content ends up there one way or other. Portage should have its own internal database for USE deps and manage it like it manages db of standard package dependencies. Robert -- Róbert Čerňanský E-mail: ope...@tightmail.com Jabber: h...@jabber.sk
