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 1Qt2L9-00080T-Hy for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:56:47 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 88E5921C28D; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:56:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from darkmetatron.de (darkmetatron.de [85.214.105.42]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F99B21C04C for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 18:55:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.126] (xdsl-78-34-189-128.netcologne.de [78.34.189.128]) by darkmetatron.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F66D53F001D for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2011 20:55:37 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E496B90.4050803@darkmetatron.de> Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 20:55:12 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?U2ViYXN0aWFuIEJlw59sZXI=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/5.0 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage autounmask is strange again References: <4E4957F9.4020505@darkmetatron.de> <5006513.oKXHeACIb6@nazgul> In-Reply-To: <5006513.oKXHeACIb6@nazgul> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.2pre Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig6659A61995BBF79AFA43A269" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 8e4ab5e578a16af5293a61488850bc2e This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig6659A61995BBF79AFA43A269 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 15.08.2011 20:02, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > It's not a bug, portage is doing what it should. >=20 > In the first case portage will try upgrade all packages to the latest=20 > version. It sees that you asked it to try autounmask stuff, so it=20 > wants to override your local mask for ExtUtils-ParseXS.=20 I don't asked portage to autounmask anything, that is a feature of portage-2.2 and should normaly only fire when there is a need to unmask (or change USE or change keyword) anything to fullfill the needs of the packages to be installed or updated. Else it would tell anyone on stable who use portage-2.2 to change to ~unstable because there is newer stuff to install. I have a large amount on packages that have newer versions that are masked and autounmask doesn't ask me to install them only because they are newer. > In the second case you have told portage to upgrade system and world=20 > but to leave masking well enough alone. As your current installed=20 > version of ExtUtils-ParseXS satisfies all needs, it makes no effort to = > try and upgrade it. I think that you not really know what the autounmask-feature of portage-2.2 is all about. Normally it does something like this: emerge =3Dperl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 -vp These are the packages that would be merged, in order: Calculating dependencies ... done! [ebuild U ] perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 [2.22.06] 0 kB Total: 1 package (1 upgrade), Size of downloads: 0 kB The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed: #required by =3Dperl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 (argument) >=3Dperl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 ~amd64 NOTE: This --autounmask behavior can be disabled by setting EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=3D"--autounmask=3Dn" in make.conf. without it would look like this: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS=3D"--autounmask=3Dn" emerge =3Dperl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 -vp These are the packages that would be merged, in order: Calculating dependencies ... done! !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "=3Dperl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0"= have been masked. !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request: - perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0::gentoo (masked by: ~amd64 keyword) For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook. It is just a other way to display what is needed to be done. If autounmask fires portage should throw an error too if trying the same thing again with autounmask=3Dn. But here it doesn't. It tells me to unmaks without any need. > The trick to working with autounmask is to realise that it is stupid=20 > software, it cannot possibly know what you want or intend. So it tries = > a blanket approach for the most part. If you have more complex masking = > than just stable/unstable statistically it will be wrong far more=20 > often than it is right. If there is a package version masked and nothing needs that version then autounmask should not fire. It should leave that alone. For me it still looks like a bug. Greetings Sebastian --------------enig6659A61995BBF79AFA43A269 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOSWuQAAoJEE2ZiVbqhmXcDhEP/2PnEDqJ7gL7BQYnv/U8PkcO J+VxAU6T2P0PcoL9Oq4Oyf3d8hxS805uXcgambF3fSO/cl2FokB/1/1bqz7z4/vl nA34Lz3A9IZwB29pG1s3lAD6Ij2vhQhqVcvVnW3xx2DmFud0f1c3vF3SmFpHa2Kh NpW0Cg+vQudw08AKP8zCTT2B/W/vf1U7TVVhl14Ph44n6gIhRB8LPx/MyBuAFFbq w1ssgHGe4Jhc1jnuVhMmg1jWbRbzmVVRp0SszJi1kXme0KF1dhJFOjinbT49iMjU cXWbnr2LASK+wISVpDBoh/thiQOY/3chpIVjfmQo6SPtQogt3ykebgi5S3rOehKW JO+P0kaX3adhAOxnp6PJY9eA7oUQlHMMRBtrKLWMMqr02+IyqnWcH++i5fbIEHc3 sKrjV8qH8Pr8QlMc5A09rm3I+s42fX3MP4H7+r+KFvJnEUfU7DWfOhjeRXN+mp6n Qrkx7a3r1oWyJqFtu7YG3ke5R+l7PXorOO/slHQb6EMqEJVPR2jjS+7pqbTVgwz4 H0Jow0yWKDTu2jIgk8e6KvsIU91goa0rdCs4At5asx45UheZLk5Ghnte2y3xwdsY xkt8lssm7opv6slTvJTn+ezAza+HQF585ryPU8pX3fXOO3UVAgGBMcilLCcWP0hm saOjjuqhLchW2M2DtCdn =ZdYn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig6659A61995BBF79AFA43A269--