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 <gentoo-user+bounces-114714-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
	id 1Ou81c-0002jg-1l
	for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 18:08:36 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AA9CCE0900
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 18:08:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052B6E07DF
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:25:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by vws15 with SMTP id 15so2994095vws.40
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from
         :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=vOz6+/IXUETdwa8Re1XIdFzB2/5OhqYm48EcoVmrLtg=;
        b=pkgqjUnHdeYUrXSMlUup7YnD3oLrcA+Jq48l8/nqKxIwSlgFA/VZpTZLGxPwcQ27RX
         dN6qPlaq2EtYPgg19u9SSBICiJVb0jZMoEmOkJbCz6NhSc79qoL6k+BIM3BnFuN+rKE8
         InMzdPE8/aXm5Pge+pYVV1mmE8tn2JzjoDRAs=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=SukD4nr9K3PGSwL9UkcDtVEs76rFj/Q1CNIf1k4rzXVicaIS/LfRhyXL3UkdoauIhU
         hpWBuY+xbbJH9OkBgt9uHjXrYh+zY8AlNcP+n2g4Hu5exlcUfW3lVBy53RuGEPESXfs3
         xw7RSQa183ATmz/hHpxuPu00qr579RpkmxFCs=
Received: by 10.220.128.22 with SMTP id i22mr592501vcs.196.1284139541588;
        Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (adsl-95-150-248.jan.bellsouth.net [98.95.150.248])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p26sm1376930vcr.27.2010.09.10.10.25.39
        (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
        Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4C8A6A12.2090905@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2010 12:25:38 -0500
From: Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100909 Gentoo/2.0.7 SeaMonkey/2.0.7
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Overlays & package.mask
References: <AANLkTik-TpefN2xEftzTHc-h772PA6FJZ27pJ=4raqeX@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik-TpefN2xEftzTHc-h772PA6FJZ27pJ=4raqeX@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 0e2acadc-69d6-4a17-8587-cd9224bc1383
X-Archives-Hash: bd5ec0e82cacbfbcaf4526eda97385c7

Hilco Wijbenga wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This morning I got
>
> centaur ~ # emerge -vDuNp world
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> <snip/>
> [ebuild     UD] kde-base/pykde4-4.5.1 [4.5.1-r1] USE="semantic-desktop
> (-aqua) -debug -doc -examples (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix)" 0 kB
> [1=>0]
> <snip/>
>
> Total: 9 packages (7 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 1 reinstall), Size of
> downloads: 10,550 kB
> Portage tree and overlays:
>   [0] /usr/portage
>   [1] /var/lib/layman/kde
>
> I decided that I did not want to go back to 4.5.1 so I added
>
> =kde-base/pykde4-4.5.1
>
> to /etc/portage/package.mask.
>
> To my utmost surprise, I got the exact same result as before when
> running the above emerge command again. I tried it with one of the
> other upgrades mentioned and package.mask had the expected result.
>
> So I'm confused. Why is package.mask not having any (apparent) effect
> for pykde4? How do I prevent the downgrade?
>
> Cheers,
> Hilco
>    

Do you have the package listed in the unmask or keyword file?  If so, it 
ignores the mask file.  Actually, I think it reads mask first then the 
others.

Hope that helps.

Dale

:-)  :-)