From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QZNBv-0005TY-QH for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:10:01 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6B4A91C161 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:09:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD8131C0A5 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 12:43:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so689874wwf.10 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 05:43:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type; bh=A9WwR2S4xyY/321fXjlJEE+Mq7IsaL/C3K48CYrvno8=; b=OJ/b0aNlV3bFSIoLTOui9Cf0NYpcaJhXqib8OQD4e6WY2uLESRNTh0llZbvs2P/55R VbqDY0281vwyvY6eSodqyTflYuZfzzHYlyyiM7pu2Hijt5rR6Im2ZwAf5ON2MOT9/umm vL9okoh6h4J4LgfKmT2A3FgdhN5QvddqzAc9o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; b=S1FejcMI4AvQzLtNBgpWxiAEvLjG4EyQZyfb67BrWvwowv6CS+uLiDecJXKyzuZNMV unTGGgzYzSR4oh/lFwzMaqAnregH3kC3fz9ZqCJM3Utw6Qjd5sq55PrRcKUhLSwKp30L SMq1UpVnjnvovTCrNIFcS77PTllEZoaei01QY= Received: by 10.227.128.138 with SMTP id k10mr672433wbs.82.1308746582820; Wed, 22 Jun 2011 05:43:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet (196-210-183-215.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.183.215]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ge4sm416943wbb.13.2011.06.22.05.43.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 22 Jun 2011 05:43:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] portage getting mixed up with USE? Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:41:57 +0200 Message-ID: <1670223.3B9JZpE7Ee@nazgul> User-Agent: KMail/4.6.0 (Linux/2.6.39-ck; KDE/4.6.4; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <2869451.8C6Z2vDv6d@nazgul> <1680906.2ZX3ghURak@nazgul> 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 777860a388726e09cbee5c86687940e7 On Wednesday 22 June 2011 14:22:00 Daniel Pielmeier did opine thusly: > > Portage has always displayed the latter right? That makes sense > > - you can see what the emerge command would do as entered and > > compare it to the error to see what the problem is. In this > > case it's a tweak to package.use which I'm perfectly happy to > > do. > > > > I think it's bug time, portage is displaying the wrong output > > for > > failures. > > You can try if you get the desired output if FEATURES="-autounmask". > If you enable autounmask portage automatically enableds the > required changes and tells you the changes required to your > configuration. It is unset here (well, it's not set, actually - same thing) I'm a sysadmin, I have an inherent distrust of all things software and automagic-config-changers are scary things indeed :-) -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com