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 1RKizV-0006cZ-8e for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:56:53 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0997221C035 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 03:56:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vms046pub.verizon.net (vms046pub.verizon.net [206.46.252.46]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j930w6Vj006221 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2005 00:58:06 GMT Received: from mail.joat.com ([71.114.140.80]) by vms046.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2 HotFix 0.04 (built Dec 24 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0INR00GNQF246C2D@vms046.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:06:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (cornholio.joat.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.joat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD58E5648 for ; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:06:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.joat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.joat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20465-08 for ; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:05:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from butthead.joat.com (butthead.joat.com [192.168.0.10]) by mail.joat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:05:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:05:36 -0400 From: Dave Nebinger Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package? In-reply-to: <200510030125.32950.mike@gaima.co.uk> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Message-id: <200510022105.36312.dnebinger@joat.com> Organization: Joat.com Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at joat.com References: <200510021839.58458.dnebinger@joat.com> <200510021949.28079.dnebinger@joat.com> <200510030125.32950.mike@gaima.co.uk> User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 X-Archives-Salt: 96e57c83-1838-4c23-8b9b-d7f54ea83ca2 X-Archives-Hash: 595162e8df2c3f9b568015bf43f3b171 On Sunday 02 October 2005 08:25 pm, Mike Williams wrote: > On Monday 03 October 2005 00:49, Dave Nebinger wrote: > > > The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or > > > deep) of your "world" list. > > > > Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in > > place as a result of a direct emerge. > > At some point, yes. Doesn't mean it is so now. Well I should have qualified it by saying that I don't clean out packages; when I install something it is because I want to try it out and/or use it. When I stop using the package, it still stays installed. So the dependency should still exist and be valid. > > Eix and emerge both knew it was installed and that it needed to be > > updated at the point when I was going to emerge eclipse. > > > > So I don't think that answer covers it... > > Is the eix database upto date? Are you really sure ant-core is actually > installed? You said "it wanting to emerge ant-core", that suggests to me > that ant-core isn't installed, unless you meant "it wanting to > upgrade/update ant-core". Eix is updated every night after the emerge --sync completes. You'll have to go back to the original post but eix (as well as emerge --search but I didn't include that output) shows that ant-core is installed. The emerge --pretend did report that mozilla and eclipse were new, but ant-core was an update. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list