See this for more details http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-282474-highlight-.html emerge system -ep the first 24 lines [ebuild N ] sys-devel/patch-2.5.9-r1 [ebuild N ] sys-libs/zlib-1.2.2 [ebuild N ] dev-python/python-fchksum-1.7.1 [ebuild N ] sys-apps/sandbox-1.2.9 [ebuild N ] sys-libs/gpm-1.20.1-r4 [ebuild N ] sys-libs/ncurses-5.4.20050319 [ebuild N ] app-shells/bash-3.0-r11 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/gnuconfig-20050602 [ebuild N ] sys-libs/readline-5.0-r2 [ebuild N ] sys-apps/diffutils-2.8.7-r1 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/binutils-config-1.8-r3 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/binutils-2.16.1 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/m4-1.4.3 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/bison-2.0 [ebuild N ] sys-apps/sed-4.1.4 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/gcc-config-1.3.11-r3 [ebuild N ] sys-apps/texinfo-4.8 [ebuild N ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.4 [ebuild N ] sys-libs/libstdc++-v3-3.3.4 [ebuild N ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.11-r2 [ebuild N ] sys-libs/glibc-2.3.5 [ebuild N ] dev-java/java-config-1.2.11-r1 [ebuild N ] dev-java/blackdown-jre-1.4.2.02 [ebuild N ] app-arch/unzip-5.52 the first 24 lines of emerge system -ep and what do we have zlib, ncurses, bash, readline, binutils, gcc, linux-headers and then glibc. Quit a fouled up build order. Or "emerge binutils gcc linux-headers glibc" It could definitlly break some peoples systems and for those whose systems arent broken its just a waste of time except for building linux-headers and glibc. I would suggest that at the minimum an emerge check for the presence of linux-headers glibc gcc binutils. What would be really nice is if at that point a code could be incorperated into the ebuilds of these progs as the type update: minor [documentation ] normal [ minor code & bug clean ups ] major [major code changes ]. Ok back to present. Minium, if l-h or glibc are detected put out a noisey warning such as portage updates do. Better if l-h then build glibc at the beginig of the emerge, better yet l-h build all 4 in the right order at the beginning of the emerge. For glibc only update; best build glibc gcc binutils at the beging or at least a big flashing sign like portage update. For gcc a sign suggecting that to take advantage of the fixs and improved code output that you start rebuilding things. Another idea is a is another switch added to that unless used the TC is left alone unless used. I realise that this is a throny issue and not a critcal one or you would bin flooded with bug reports but it is causeing problems with casual way that the TC is now being handled. Oh and dont laugh to hard at my script in the above link
current system looks fine to me
