From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8251 invoked by uid 1002); 17 Dec 2002 00:59:09 -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 26732 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2002 00:59:08 -0000 Message-ID: <4937.216.190.203.130.1040086617.squirrel@squirrelmail.kydance.net> Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:56:57 -0700 (MST) From: "Matthew Walker" To: In-Reply-To: <3DFE821F.8040609@foser.warande.net> References: <3DFE1BD9.5090004@foser.warande.net> <20021216203412.GB8276@wolverine.hh.iq-computing.de> <3DFE7864.9060903@foser.warande.net> <4874.216.190.203.130.1040084798.squirrel@squirrelmail.kydance.net> <3DFE821F.8040609@foser.warande.net> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.10) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo &quot;stable&quot; going in wrong direction ? X-Archives-Salt: 81d8134d-5cb3-459a-9281-b366c0253ec2 X-Archives-Hash: 29d1b36a21cf501f6d7b75c726ca083b foser said: > Matthew Walker wrote: >> Yes, it would, currently. However, this is just an indication that >> portage needs to skip updates that it can not satisfy the dependencies >> of, and continue with the update instead of just dying. > > Just to get this clear, does or doesn't it break nowadays? I don't do > much upgrade worlds anymore, so i can't tell ;) > It still breaks. > - foser > > > -- > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list