Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 13:54:25 -0800, Grant wrote: > >> Got it. So @preserved-rebuild is meant to be a replacement for >> revdep-rebuild > No, it is a means of preventing the problems that revdep-rebuild fixes. > > If revdep-rebuild were a medicine, @preserved-rebuild would be a vaccine. > > Which you choose to use depends on whether you prefer fixing broken > systems to avoiding them. > > revdep-rebuild is an external program created to deal with a shortcoming > in emerge, that shortcoming was the lack of @preserved-rebuild. There may > be times when @preserved-rebuild fails, although they are becoming > increasingly rare, so revdep-rebuild is still useful as a fallback, but > the main reason I run it from my weekly system check script is as a > sanity check. It rarely finds anything. > >
That's been my experience too. I run @preserved-rebuild when it tells me to but revdep-rebuild rarely finds anything. Thing is, it has a time or two. It is best to run revdep-rebuild and be sure than not to and run the risk of not being able to boot or some other problem that bites you. Sort of like a ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. ;-) Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
