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 1R3DBf-0006n8-1H for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:33:03 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CF71A21C29B; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:32:48 +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 954A821C034 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:31:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwg14 with SMTP id 14so3068694wwg.10 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:31:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iUQzzy6BT3KCsqYfpAM7xRg9Ih64T+O6BD+V94ngFp0=; b=uANbQeaxyB65YTfi+p3X1aT3EEpec2NPMPnZyZCbM1i0ZLFKhMdq49ucUTECZuh3KU lSD14MP1bFuv7rvP9B3c2Z8A1+FCV2uWV/xNgPCMPiRFepfqWq1WIobaGrghhLvT6zE6 pHw+0l6YK+UqkeM+MQfugIVhwIwukKKPWdFeQ= Received: by 10.216.154.69 with SMTP id g47mr1618416wek.11.1315859486721; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:31:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rohan (196-210-153-55.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.153.55]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id fq9sm17359681wbb.15.2011.09.12.13.31.21 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 12 Sep 2011 13:31:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 22:31:12 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: package.provided messes up emerging of package slots? Message-ID: <20110912223112.754b6ef9@rohan> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Internet Solutions X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 024d71ea410ba42ef95e017d1d56074e On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:49:28 +0300 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > On 09/12/2011 07:31 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote: > > > > On Sep 12, 2011 11:11 PM, "Nikos Chantziaras" > > wrote: > > > > > > In my /etc/portage/profile/package.provided, I have this: > > > > > > media-libs/freetype-1.4_pre20080316-r2 > > > > > > When I try to emerge freetype however, instead of emerging the > > > newer > > version, I get: > > > > > > $ emerge freetype > > > > > > WARNING: A requested package will not be merged because it is > > > listed in package.provided: > > > > > > freetype pulled in by 'args' > > > > > > Nothing to merge; would you like to auto-clean packages? > > > [Yes/No] > > > > > > Trying "emerge freetype:2" also won't work. The only only to > > > emerge > > it seems is by using the whole version ("emerge =freetype-2.4.6"). > > Is this a bug? > > > > Why did you have that line in package.provided, in the first place? > > Did you install freetype on your own, without using portage? > > Portage installs both freetype-1 as well as freetype-2. texlive has > freetype-1 as a dep, and I don't want it installed because I'm not > using ttf2tfm. > > > > The way I see it, Portage worked perfectly: it saw that you have > > installed a certain version of freetype on your own, and it didn't > > want to mess up your installed package. > > > > Just delete the line and emerge freetype. > > From my point of view, it doesn't work perfectly, because it behaves > differently when freetype-1 is really installed, and when it's not > but listed in package.provided. If I install freetype-1 and type: > > emerge freetype > > it will emerge freetype:2. So the behavior is vastly different > between having freetype really installed, and when not but listed in > package.provided. That's because a package being installed and being provided are not the same thing and are treated very differently. If you install xyz-1.2.3 then portage knows what it did to achieve that and can deal with it as normal. If you provide xyz-1.2.3 then portage does not know what *you* did to achieve that and makes no attempt to deal with it at all. You are expected to completely 100% deal with all of xyz, including all slots. "man 5 portage" mentions that the version number is there in package.provided so that portage can alert you if some other package has a dep on a version of xyz you did not provide. Seen in that light, the behaviour is indeed sensible, just not consistent if you haven't read the docs yet. I don't think it's wise to try and change portage's behaviour with this, as Michael said in another sub-thread portage has no idea what you did so it can't even try to take control of different slots for fear it might clobber all your manual hard work -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com