On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Martin Vaeth wrote:
> Zac Medico wrote:
> > The -* wildcard has been supported since portage-2.3.4, but it was
> > not explicitly documented.
>
> Shouldn't this be -** to remove all _system_ packages?
> Or does -* really
Zac Medico wrote:
> The -* wildcard has been supported since portage-2.3.4, but it was
> not explicitly documented.
Shouldn't this be -** to remove all _system_ packages?
Or does -* really mean to remove only _profile_ packages?
Or does -* remove all profile _and_ system
The -* wildcard has been supported since portage-2.3.4, but it was
not explicitly documented.
X-Gentoo-Bug: 610670
X-Gentoo-Bug-URL: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610670
---
man/portage.5 | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/man/portage.5
On 05/20/2017 06:30 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
>
> Please review.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Michał Górny
>
>
It looks much as you mentioned it'd be: moving code around and cutting
down duplication. Looks good to me. I really appreciate the example in
patch 7, which makes it a little more clear
I have just marked php-pear-lib-r1 as DEAD in the Gentoo repository.
This eclass has a call in pkg_setup which many packages used ${FILESDIR}
to reference a file needed to add a channel to php's pear system.
Recently, changes in portage causes all packages depending on it in this
way to fail as
On 05/24/2017 12:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Yes, I *do not want feedback* on *how to do Gentoo* from people who do
*not help me do Gentoo* but instead only complain and demand.
But you do gentoo wrong, so as a user I'd like you to reconsider what
you wrote there and maybe take a long
On 05/23/2017 12:31 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> [snip]
> Your comments?
>
Since it's adding a list instead of warping an existing one, I say go
ahead on the condition that everything important finds its way to a more
open list. I'm subscribed to enough as it is.
I am skeptical that it will lead