On Sun, 15 Oct 2017 04:17:49 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> I can also imagine doing something drastic like hourly depcleans, if
> that's what it too, too, after dealing with a 1900-pkg-depclean! Yikes!
It does sound like a lot, but when you have minimal chroots with only 9
Kent Fredric posted on Sun, 15 Oct 2017 06:36:34 +1300 as excerpted:
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 07:50:38 + (UTC)
> Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Wow. How'd you ever get a backlog of 400 packages in your depclean
>> list,
>> including critical ones you know you want to keep? These da
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 07:50:38 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Wow. How'd you ever get a backlog of 400 packages in your depclean list,
> including critical ones you know you want to keep? These days portage
> even strongly suggests running depclean after an --update @world,
# Kent Fredric (14 Oct 2017)
# 12 years without upstream responding to bugs, code almost
# irredeemably unmaintainable and with no way to demonstrate it
# actually works. Bug #634244
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
dev-perl/Apache-SessionX
pgphHSq8ody1m.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
