From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 485CF139085 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 12:51:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0E8BB21C08E; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 12:51:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wj0-x242.google.com (mail-wj0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c01::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A83121C038 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 12:51:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wj0-x242.google.com with SMTP id xy5so17706259wjc.1 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 04:51:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version; bh=0mnpn+EBQwlx+/anqqErwLBLUOX7Ny319Pkz0ybYlOk=; b=SUZmS94WMhYVvFigjlGYKyzQsU/b6aQ1iSiSdKRE3tjGots6p1YtVQ4UjZK/qk4qQj /M4PUQ3vOS/XlZgc8rTmIpSEAqRMANknkhc2crr4w2qsv7PcqjB+7C3RY+cpn+zVMLpj 10pmZZH9iggaVu3st/xEnncBFAi5jwciP2V0qwSaiUgkXVttFEORJq+xuvLXybAfbD2E UKtP2dK+dlInWRUACq9741a/CqVr+FUYWn2jXHr63XeUceBOrorHYhqhEsBEePIW3JbL s3NSS9rqnBKDHw2XyKpirMZ0UXQpQgF+iuNdhbeEnN920kU0BLHbQ0nwkZpXuPH5XxDs d4xg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:reply-to:subject:date:message-id :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version; bh=0mnpn+EBQwlx+/anqqErwLBLUOX7Ny319Pkz0ybYlOk=; b=Y92ICjfprL6YmU5p0jL4WecqS4Z6GEt6A+rUxgLA3yGdeNukg1k8liKZ9crXj6GhKo LF5JZcTHhudqOINW0ANiY0/WQwx3+UyTgTfHrtPJXWAJwD6f1Hs+nAtOSBTPv4pshwxD 29ZVhmsSNTvI6xjLcHJkf5m7OivlOvd/gm93OkFgsPzxwVvV3U8ibzTVD1e9lJJhnLEj Pkh3NI2odwcZCSAxT8QRmXAG/CTze6cfnKoQLpxiKXM3r52E5NMSa/RrliWoG6qqtwTh DuDW9RWKVxHD0BEz8nqR4QYsCjSdzoHzTkmnHKaMx1R+8p8YANW4JHfmEhdut79AsBRO DF4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKfJG6OuJmYaTMCkgfRouDBZRqElA+W3HAeHh9y8bfgmoKMxDA67RhzM+2A/ZpOgg== X-Received: by 10.194.148.4 with SMTP id to4mr6745152wjb.194.1481979092992; Sat, 17 Dec 2016 04:51:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa. [217.169.3.230]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q7sm11366474wjh.9.2016.12.17.04.51.31 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 17 Dec 2016 04:51:32 -0800 (PST) From: Mick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage vs Qt Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 12:51:15 +0000 Message-ID: <1611520.iiMYLpH0bh@dell_xps> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.4.26-gentoo; KDE/4.14.24; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20161217122718.4971f7f1@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> References: <20161214050600.GC1795@ca.inter.net> <20161217122718.4971f7f1@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1641713.qbIMK2l2Br"; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 099bc873-9411-41e4-9fa4-3aa146eac01c X-Archives-Hash: 97181d748cf388f8bdcf365e37a0a5c9 --nextPart1641713.qbIMK2l2Br Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Saturday 17 Dec 2016 12:27:18 Kai Krakow wrote: > Am Wed, 14 Dec 2016 00:06:00 -0500 >=20 > schrieb Philip Webb : > > I just updated Qt5 to 5.6.2 & ran into a familiar Portage problem. > >=20 > > The emerge command responds with a list of "conflicts", > > all involving 5.6.1 vs 5.6.2 versions of the c 15 pkgs. > > The only way to get around this is to unmerge the existing pkgs via= > > '-C', then install the new versions. That works, but it's brute > > force. > >=20 > > Portage sb able to resolve this kind of conflict for itself. > > If not, then at least it should advise users intelligently > > to do what I've just described. It can happen with other sets of > > pkgs. > >=20 > > Yes, I did do 'backtrack=3D=3D30'. > >=20 > > Before I send in a bug, does anyone else have useful comments ? >=20 > I constantly see the same conflict and haven't nailed it down exactly= > right now. It seems to happen when one package requires a binary > compatibility to an older version of a depend but can also be built > against the newer version. Usually, emerge should trigger a rebuild > then. But this doesn't seem to work when both packages (the depend an= d > the depender) are updated at the same time. Portage then pulls in the= > old and the new version of the same package at the same time, resulti= ng > in a conflict. >=20 > Upgrading the depends with "-1a" first sometimes helps but usually I'= ll > also resolv it by unmerging the conflicting package first. Or, I usually end up unmerging the older version and emerge then picks = up the=20 latest stable version of the dependency. I'm not saying this is the co= rrect=20 way to do it but either of these two methods get me out of the woods=20= eventually. =20 =2D-=20 Regards, Mick --nextPart1641713.qbIMK2l2Br Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAABCAAGBQJYVTTDAAoJELAdA+zwE4YeJmYIAMyr2AFoBlJmRDo3SnGiHpAq nDYwhP2boUbvV2++UDJWDgmz2RDrZbPB3yPxgvGxaJ5kw80OnjOuwH3zJJw1Oe0q 0EIh9fBriQeAIrHT7AdTqqcS7ybwGvSuHtTYUr2Xh8ZyhIRqwDFcURXxrsicf8hj /eLp4wsbf1YpfMKIbu9/gVRb8mUTIfeSW80etAOi75ApzngUs0y5UjTcMzwuMSKW NKcJAF/cER2K3rgEmoKPnFXbWiCCnEa2cmRluE2TMX2xmOIfJUeDIJEezL4gXRm4 mNcR9UEfUYBPuch/bhMVoSEf+GLrKw/bb3H+kC2N/ps42CH5AhWEw4ZHoN5v05Q= =cihD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1641713.qbIMK2l2Br--