portage suggestion - --exclude option

Klavs · Guru Joined: 22 May 2002 Posts: 536 Location: Denmark

Hi guys,

I was wondering if I was the only one who could really use an --exclude option.

emerge -Uu php (or whatever) often gives me 30-50 packages needing to be upgraded - some of which is big packages (like X) due to a small -rX change.

Therefore it would be great with an --exclude option, so I could list the packages not to be considered. The --exclude-file option would be cool too.

Even cooler would it be to have a --disregard-revision-only-changes flag too or something like that

_________________
Best regards,

Klavs Klavsen
Denmark

Working with Unix is like wrestling a worthy opponent.
Working with windows is like attacking a small whining child
who is carrying a .38.

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

Both "problems" you describe are solved (by you) through the USE="" flags in /etc/make.conf and by (gentoo dev's) ensuring ebuilds are properly written and dont request a package upgrade unless its neccesary.

You can also use the emerge --inject to exclude packages you dont want, to trick portage into thinking its already availabe. So everything you requested is already in Gentoo :-)

Edit: Obviously, you didnt ask about the USE="" option, so never mind that :-)

BUT: You can still inject packages, like I mentioned above. However, when an ebuild requires one or several package upgrades it _should_ be a reason for doing so (eg. needs it to work properly) However I suspect most never ebuilds just wants the latest version anyway... I know mine does hehe...

What Id like as a feature instead, is a list of DO_NOT_TOUCH_THESE_PROGRAMS_EVER_NEVER so I could put what I want into this list and never have to worry about them being screwed by an emerge world or something similar. I am not aware of any features that does this.

Klavs · Guru Joined: 22 May 2002 Posts: 536 Location: Denmark

Nope it's not.

I have X installed - and I want it to be. I just don't want it to be upgraded when I run emerge -Uu php - but I don't want to manually list the 27 other upgrades it suggests when running emerge -Uu (or even with --deep) php because I don't want it to upgrade X.

You see what I mean?
_________________
Best regards,

Klavs Klavsen
Denmark

Working with Unix is like wrestling a worthy opponent.
Working with windows is like attacking a small whining child
who is carrying a .38.

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

Yes, I see what you mean - and ive said how to solve it ;-)

Just emerge --inject the package you dont want to upgrade, and I recon it will work.

Klavs · Guru Joined: 22 May 2002 Posts: 536 Location: Denmark

So you want me to inject packages that I don't want upgraded. so if I don't want 10 out of 50 packages upgraded, I should inject them - and then when a new revision comes along - I should inject that again ?

Doesn't sound like a very good solution, to what I think is a fair need, considering how often Gentoo's packages get upgraded.
_________________
Best regards,

Klavs Klavsen
Denmark

Working with Unix is like wrestling a worthy opponent.
Working with windows is like attacking a small whining child
who is carrying a .38.

plate · Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:28 pm Post subject:

Fair enough. But injecting does provide an immediate workaround, and nobody stops you from using fictitious version numbers. emerge -i x11-base/xfree86-5.0 should leave your installation well outside the greedy reach of portage upgrade attempts for quite a while.

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

Exactly

Edit: I'd still like a DO-NOT-TOUCH-THESE-PROGRAMS-EVER-NEVER list in Gentoo. I think that would solve most of the problems you describe... There are other packages besides X id like emerge to never touch.

crazy-bee · Apprentice Joined: 03 Jan 2003 Posts: 170

Count me in.

I definitly need such an option, too.

I helped myself with marking the packages I do not want to be touched as masked, but since this is always overwritten with an emerge sync, it sucks since it has to be done manually.

Lion · Apprentice Joined: 23 Jun 2002 Posts: 207

I think that we don't need an --exclude here, but that the --upgrade option does too much. IMO "emerge --upgrade package" should do only that: upgrade the named package if an upgrade is available, and only upgrade dependencies if the dependency upgrade is REQUIRED by the newer package.

Instead, now, if package depends on X, for example, and you --upgrade package, an upgrade for X is automatically performed, even if package would function perfectly with the older version of X.

I don't see any reason why --upgrade should do this.
For automatic update of dependencies, we have --deep, don't we?

I think I'm going to file a request for change of the --update behaviour in bugzilla.

Matje · Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 8:24 am Post subject:

You might want to try emerge -U, without the -u flag. This way, only the packages necessary get installed, instead of telling portage to upgrade everything php depends of...

Lion · Apprentice Joined: 23 Jun 2002 Posts: 207

Matje · Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 9:49 am Post subject:

Lion · Apprentice Joined: 23 Jun 2002 Posts: 207

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

I agree, updating -rX versions which quite clearly poses no real advantage beside the fancy new -rX extension is pointless really, and should only occure when you request it with --deep option. EDIT: I realize there _are_ changes in a package when they change the -rX number, but often these are just additional comments in a config file for example.

I believe a redesign of the --upgrade feature, together with a NEVER-TOUCH-THESE-PACKAGES-EVER (maybe a /usr/portage/profiles/package.protected file) list to put packages of your liking into would go along way to solve this problem.

Edit: typo

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

Example of broken behaviour:

Ssl · Apprentice Joined: 21 Feb 2003 Posts: 178 Location: Serbia

Matje · Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2003 8:50 am Post subject:

Just inject the package, less hassle, and it works too when you try anything else as emerge world...
_________________
Life is like a box of chocolates... Before you know it, it's empty...

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

deepthought · Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2003 7:58 pm Post subject:

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

Ok, if the "pin-feature" works they way you describe it, I agree it fits the needs I wanted, so thanks for pointing that out. I misunderstood this feature when it was mentioned before, since I didnt realize you _could_ lock a certain version from never being updated.

Genone · Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2003 12:26 am Post subject:

There is already a bug for this: 16342. I'm really for it as I think the inject is an ugly workaround and the version-pinning never worked right for me. Well, at least I have now another item on my "things I wanna do to portage"-list.

deepthought · Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:19 am Post subject:

Hm, at least for me, version pinning works perfectly. What's wrong with it?

Regards,
Alexander
_________________
Out of loyalty to its disregarded comrades, this message feels free to ignore the reader.
Registered Linux User #317705

Loke · Apprentice Joined: 25 May 2002 Posts: 274 Location: Norway

Not that Ive tried it yet, but wouldnt version pinning only work for world upgrades? It seems logical at least, and im pretty sure it does this by design - but is this what the requests in this thread deals with?

Genone · Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:49 am Post subject:

Mnemia · Guru Joined: 17 May 2002 Posts: 476

OK, here's a weird one for ya guys -