Re: Reverse-dependency support in Portage2 ?

Well frankly, wouldn't a second to a second be a third? Therefore I
hearby 'fourth' that measure. :)

On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 18:02, Miguel S. Filipe wrote:
> Jean-Michel Smith wrote:
> 
> >On Thursday 30 May 2002 05:57 am, Dan Naumov wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Hey.
> >>
> >>I would like to know whether some kind of reverse-dependency support is
> >>going to be included in Portage2. It would be nice if in case of
> >>unmerging a package, Portage would let the user know whether some
> >>installed packages need it and if so, what packages do.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >I would second that feature request.  It would also allow for some 
> >intelligent 
> >'auto-healing' of the system, by allowing one to (optionally) recompile any 
> >packages dependent on an ebuild that has just been upgraded so they run 
> >against the newest version or warning one before a package upon which others 
> >rely is removed.  This is the one feature I miss most about Source Mage 
> >(sorcerer).
> >
> >Jean.
> >_______________________________________________
> >gentoo-dev mailing list
> >gentoo-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> >http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> >
> >  
> >
> Yes, that must be something that the next version of portage address.
> I also second that feature request!
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>