[gentoo-user] file collision on net-libs/neon-0.29.3

[gentoo-user] file collision on net-libs/neon-0.29.3

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 644 bytes --]

Please remind me what we are supposed to do when we get:

 * Package 'net-libs/neon-0.29.3' NOT merged due to file collisions. If
 * necessary, refer to your elog messages for the whole content of the
 * above message.

Checking for file ownership gives me:

# portageq owners / /usr/bin/neon-config          
net-misc/neon-0.29.3
	/usr/bin/neon-config

# portageq owners / /usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
net-misc/neon-0.29.3
	/usr/include/neon/ne_207.h

and so on.  How come that I cannot install net-misc/neon-0.29.3 due to file 
collisions, when it is this package which owns the files in the first place?
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] file collision on net-libs/neon-0.29.3

[Alex Schuster]

Mick writes:

> Please remind me what we are supposed to do when we get:
> 
>  * Package 'net-libs/neon-0.29.3' NOT merged due to file collisions. If
>  * necessary, refer to your elog messages for the whole content of the
>  * above message.

You could force installation with FEATURES="-collision-protect -protect-
owned" emerge neon. Or emerge -c remove neon first if it is already 
installed.

> Checking for file ownership gives me:
> 
> # portageq owners / /usr/bin/neon-config
> net-misc/neon-0.29.3
> 	/usr/bin/neon-config
> 
> # portageq owners / /usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
> net-misc/neon-0.29.3
> 	/usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
> 
> and so on.  How come that I cannot install net-misc/neon-0.29.3 due to
> file collisions, when it is this package which owns the files in the
> first place?

Strange! So it is installed already? Did you chaneg USE flags, so it gets 
emerged again? Or did something go wrong when installing it the last time?

I have no idea, I wouldn't think what you see is possible at all.

	Wonko

[gentoo-user] Re: file collision on net-libs/neon-0.29.3

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 06/23/2010 01:56 AM, Alex Schuster wrote:
> Mick writes:
>> Checking for file ownership gives me:
>>
>> # portageq owners / /usr/bin/neon-config
>> net-misc/neon-0.29.3
>> 	/usr/bin/neon-config
>>
>> # portageq owners / /usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
>> net-misc/neon-0.29.3
>> 	/usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
>>
>> and so on.  How come that I cannot install net-misc/neon-0.29.3 due to
>> file collisions, when it is this package which owns the files in the
>> first place?
>
> Strange! So it is installed already? Did you chaneg USE flags, so it gets
> emerged again? Or did something go wrong when installing it the last time?
>
> I have no idea, I wouldn't think what you see is possible at all.

neon got moved from net-misc to net-libs.  It's just that the maintainer 
forgot to rename the package if already installed.  In those cases, you 
either wait till the maintainer renames it, which will be picked up in 
the next sync, or you just unmerge and then update again.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: file collision on net-libs/neon-0.29.3

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1195 bytes --]

On Wednesday 23 June 2010 00:17:30 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 06/23/2010 01:56 AM, Alex Schuster wrote:
> > Mick writes:
> >> Checking for file ownership gives me:
> >>
> >> # portageq owners / /usr/bin/neon-config
> >> net-misc/neon-0.29.3
> >> 	/usr/bin/neon-config
> >>
> >> # portageq owners / /usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
> >> net-misc/neon-0.29.3
> >> 	/usr/include/neon/ne_207.h
> >>
> >> and so on.  How come that I cannot install net-misc/neon-0.29.3 due to
> >> file collisions, when it is this package which owns the files in the
> >> first place?
> >
> > Strange! So it is installed already? Did you chaneg USE flags, so it gets
> > emerged again? Or did something go wrong when installing it the last
> > time?
> >
> > I have no idea, I wouldn't think what you see is possible at all.
> 
> neon got moved from net-misc to net-libs.  It's just that the maintainer
> forgot to rename the package if already installed.  In those cases, you
> either wait till the maintainer renames it, which will be picked up in
> the next sync, or you just unmerge and then update again.

Thanks guys!  A resync this morning did it a world of good!
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]