Neil Bothwick wrote: >On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:00:59 -0300, Francisco Ares wrote: > > >>And that's a good point: /var/portage gets pretty full of hundreds of >>megs once in a while, and so does /usr/portage/distfiles and (in my >>case) /usr/portage/packages - so how could portage clean up by default >>the binary packages >> >> > >I don't think it could, because it doesn't know which ones you wish to >keep. I don't know about your reasons, but I use buildpkg so I always have >a binary of the previous version available, making it easy to roll back if >a problem arises. > > > That's a good idea, but how often do you need a roll back? I sure have had some headaches, but at the end the new packages were kept, just had to learn how to use the new features/configurations (thanks to the development guys who are doing a wonderful job in keeping the stable packages, well, stable!)
I imagine that a new FEATURES key could provide a full cleanup of the /usr/portage/packages/ and /var/tmp/portage . I would set-up this new feature just at the last machine to be updated and for each architecture type. By the way, here it goes a suggestion for the portage developers: when building a binary package, please include an architecture identifier and check this ID before merging binary packages. -- Francisco -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
