Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 18:34:36 +0100, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > >> but as long as X is not restarted, the upgrade doesn't break anything. >> You come back, you read the elogs, you downgrade the drivers and >> everything is fine and dandy. >> > > Except you've wasted time and resources compiling the broken version of > the software and then recompiling the version you already had. If the > ebuild, in fact it's the nvidia.eclass, can detect that proceeding will > cause breakage, why proceed? > > Then there's the case where an update to another package now prevents the > old one from compiling. It shouldn't happen, but it does, so why risk all > those disadvantages when portage could use its --keep-going code to > restart the emerge with the net package? > > >
I wonder if the same would be said about something like baselayout or some other system package that just can't be . . . screwed up? If a new udev would break my system and it knew it, then updated it anyway, it wouldn't be a inconvenience at that point. I would be pissed because I only have one system and no way to search for a fix either. I would be putting a new meaning to shooting in the dark. Dale :-) :-)
