Arve Barsnes wrote: > On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 at 10:57, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Just some additional info. I did a update on my main rig the other >> day. According to emerge, everything is just fine. I ran perl-cleaner >> with pretend, it is wanting to emerge some 200 packages. Looks like Wol >> is right. We need to run this after each OS update. Maybe this should >> be documented in a wiki somewhere??? > Sometimes you need a hammer, but most of the time you don't. Have not > used perl-cleaner for a while, so I tried it here, and it found no > packages needing to be rebuilt. > > IMO, only bring out the hammer if you're having a problem. > > Regards, > Arve > >
Like on my last problem, I didn't realize it was a perl problem. That problem was likely lurking for a while just waiting on the right thing to happen so it could pop up. For me, I try to keep a clean system. I like clean upgrades, all packages to be linked to each other that should be and for them to be in sync when needed. If running perl-cleaner will prevent problems, I don't mind pulling out that hammer when all I need is a small hammer. It's better than waiting for things to start failing and then not know what hammer you need or even worse, what to hit. Way back when I ran into weird problems, I would do a emerge -e world. Oddly enough, that tended to fix problems that emerge didn't pick up on. Likely some package that was linked wrong during the upgrade of another package. Today, we have tools that help prevent that. I haven't done a emerge -e for that reason in a while. Last I can remember was when we were told to do that in a news item. Some problems are best fixed while small. When they get big, they get harder to fix. That's my thinking. To each his/her own tho. ;-) Dale :-) :-)
