[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
From:       Jim Ramsay <lack () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2010-07-19 20:19:34
Message-ID: 20100719201933.GA8710 () altair ! netopia ! am ! mot ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 07:28:40PM +0200, Markus Hauschild wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Mike Auty <ikelos@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Ideally, these calls should either adhere to FEATURES="-preserve-libs",
> > or there should be a tool that can identify which files portage has
> > preserved, and allow easy rebuilding of dependent packages, and removal.
> >  At the moment, I'm having to manually grep ebuilds, ls the libraries
> > and run revdep-rebuild over them one at a time...
> 
> Such a tool which can at least identify files that remain on the
> system from preserved-libs or similar would be really useful in my
> opinion!

What if preserve_old_libs did the following:

  mv ${oldlib} ${oldlib}.preserved
  ln -s ${oldlib}.preserved ${oldlib}

Cons: 2 files to delete once you're done revdep-rebuilding

Pros: Easy to tell at a glance which libs are the preserved libs.

-- 
Jim Ramsay

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]