On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:13:00 -0600, Dale wrote: > > That may have been the case some time ago, but depclean is much safer > > now. Notice that the warning at the start of its output has > > disappeared now?
> That is true but let's say a person updates python but forgets or > doesn't know, to run python-updater, will --depclean know that? If packages depnd on the older version of python, depclean won't remove them. If it's just a matter of depending on the correct modules, python-updater will fix that after the older python has been removed. > What if emerge doesn't work and they don't have buildpkg of some sort in > make.conf? Why would emerge stop itself working? > I agree that --depclean is a LOT better but there are still situations > where it can mess up a system. It is best to be careful and really > look at that list before letting it remove a package. Basically, don't > type it in and walk off to let it do whatever it wants. While I always run it with --pretend first, that's because I'm more curious than paranoid. What are these situations in which it can really mess up a system and are they situations that any sensible user would put themselves in? > I also seem to remember that big warning when --depclean runs. I think > that may still be there for a reason. ;-) See above, that warning has been gone for some time. The preamble now contains this indication that depclean is a lot more cautious. * As a safety measure, depclean will not remove any packages * unless *all* required dependencies have been resolved. As a * consequence, it is often necessary to run `emerge --update * --newuse --deep @system @world` prior to depclean. -- Neil Bothwick If your VCR still flashes 12:00 - then Linux is not for you.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
