From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
	by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-16699-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
	id 1GLLAc-0007Qu-Ln
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:47:59 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k87EkPSb003250;
	Thu, 7 Sep 2006 14:46:25 GMT
Received: from buggy.blubb.ch (cable-static-87-245-102-53.shinternet.ch [87.245.102.53])
	by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k87Eg9kd026439
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 14:42:10 GMT
Received: from [192.168.10.5] (helo=[192.168.10.5])
	by buggy.blubb.ch with esmtp (Exim 4.54)
	id 1GLL42-0006pU-Jf
	for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:41:10 +0200
Message-ID: <45002FC3.9050608@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 16:42:11 +0200
From: Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060824)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev]  Re: Re: packages going into the tree with non-gentoo
 maintainers
References: <20060903112049.29f5026e@c1358217.kevquinn.com> <450002B7.5000600@gentoo.org> <45000715.5030407@gentoo.org> <200609071525.53741.carlo@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <200609071525.53741.carlo@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: ac12962f-5ee2-40bd-99af-9d4813d83174
X-Archives-Hash: e8168bf4feb907cc4fe0de60b174fa96

Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> One question remains: Is it needed/correct that Portage doesn't take blockers 
> for architecture breakages into account? Such a line/prefix is easily changed 
> and when someone - whatever the bad reason is - uses cvs commit, a real tree 
> breakage is the cause.

The behaviour is correct. The depstring in question was
"!<app-text/hunspell-1.0", which means that you can't have <hunspell-1.0
and kdelibs installed on a system at the same time. Reason for this
could e.g. be file collisions that got fixed in hunspell-1.0.

If the depstring was "!<app-text/hunspell-1.0 app-text/hunspell", (same
as ">=app-text/hunspell-1.0", just retarded)  repoman would complain loudly.

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list