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 F2509138330 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 13:37:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 501C1E0899; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 13:37:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from post.dmesg.site (unknown [IPv6:2001:bc8:2377:501::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E275CE0885 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 13:37:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from matrics.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2a02:2f0a:b0b0:c56:34bd:9798:b0f7:710a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by post.dmesg.site (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C167FA01245 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2018 15:36:56 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=dmesg.site; s=default; t=1515332219; bh=f/s1LXL4bDoaTi8SLx7zgUp0DhZ5rKA0NVUWvc8uAgA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=pCcg5p/1js1k29dko5K1WHeyyVAmVNP5SmQ992IzpGDT1ZF8JO/TR42OcmYP2tm+p i0dtT6juTXrRSjegZQjZNT1M0VChH5Z94Bzrs081pgpsHGRqQLNJf+uR8QVTjxJkF3 F7Zn/6RTeWV4VavjPZD4WBp33P84caXKYm/t3G9g= From: zless To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: emerge @preserved-rebuild failure Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2018 15:36:56 +0200 Message-ID: <2113503.McqP9FOfaP@matrics> In-Reply-To: <1515287372.2071.3.camel@gentoo.org> References: <6eca4cee-04d5-31df-8dab-ec42947e09cb@hfigge.myfqdn.de> <2703216.2rPtTa19zP@matrics> <1515287372.2071.3.camel@gentoo.org> 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: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Archives-Salt: 717a8de7-ce69-413c-8976-d4b170f932bc X-Archives-Hash: cd700dfa42d249bab56d91ed7f7887ed =C3=8En ziua de duminic=C4=83, 7 ianuarie 2018, la 03:09:32 EET, Mart Rauds= epp a scris: > > To me this reads as readline-7.0_p3 depends on libs from readline- > > 6.3. > >=20 > > Smells a bit as some sort of bug. Try rebuilding readline? > >=20 > > This didn't happen here when readline was bumped. >=20 > This is no bug here. It's just storing the fact that it preserved these > /lib64/libreadline.so.6{,.3} under the replacing newer version package. > That is, readline-7.0_p3 now owns these files, but based on this > registry, they will be deleted and removed from its CONTENTS, once > there are no more consumers of it based on essentially NEEDED.ELF.2 > contents in the VDB (/var/db/pkg/*/*/NEEDED.ELF.2). > That is, what is keeping them from being removed is not stored in this > registry. Thanks for the in-depth explanation. Do you think that revdep-rebuild would= 've=20 helped here? And a bit off-topic for this thread (but it's a subject that interests me):= =20 does the preserved rebuild feature track user installed programs (outside o= f=20 portage control)?