From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7841 invoked by uid 1002); 1 May 2003 09:07:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 5063 invoked from network); 1 May 2003 09:07:27 -0000 Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 04:07:21 -0500 From: Nick Jones To: duchier@ps.uni-sb.de Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030501090721.GB355@twobit.net> Mail-Followup-To: duchier@ps.uni-sb.de, gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <86u1cio0hs.fsf@speedy.ps.uni-sb.de> <20030429070659.GA14884@zaphod.anachem.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> <87ptn5gvkc.fsf@tdg.loria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jho1yZJdad60DJr+" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87ptn5gvkc.fsf@tdg.loria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: emerge -Up tetex wants to downgrade X-Archives-Salt: b89470d1-dd53-46f0-88eb-27210ad04775 X-Archives-Hash: 98222453d365e3856aacf9cadc16f45c --jho1yZJdad60DJr+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> Tetex 2.0-r1 has been removed from portage. It looks like emerge >> tries to be on the safe side and rather downgrade than keep >> a version it does not know about. If you upgrade to tetex-2.0.2, >> emerge -U should no longer try to downgrade. > Thank you very much! That explains it and your suggestion fixed the > problem. However, is this really the _right_ behaviour? This is proper behavior. You are crossing borders from Stable to=20 unstable. Portage NEVER crosses that border without being told to explicitly, which is why you have to specify ~x86. You're attempting to update a package from inside the Stable branch in your first attempt. Portage only sees one possibility because it will not assume that you meant to stay in ~x86 even though the package was previously merged that way. This behavior will change slightly in the 2.1 series of portage. --NJ --jho1yZJdad60DJr+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+sOPIH/cWKbF87VYRAmhaAKCUJBtV+LvSbCA5hmsXlP+TNntivwCfeeav 6FQ16ihNjEyDmYtj3jtxZzM= =Yy5b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jho1yZJdad60DJr+--