Re: [gentoo-user] Re: blockage

[Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Sadly, you don't know. There is no clue in any of the output you
> posted that this is required, so your only solution is to ask the
> collective memory of the community. Lucky for you and others, Jonathan
> was aware of the problem and was kind enough to post the solution.
> This is one of the things that is starting to real get on my damn tits
> about portage, for about 2 years now. It's not an easy problem to
> solve, and to be honest, portage is not helping at all. You have two
> options in running it: don't use -v and get very little info, or use
> -v and get a terminal dump of the entire graph tree with lots of stuff
> and zero real information about how to solve it. Look at my thread
> with Dale just the other day, I managed to help him with the correct
> answer because I had a magic brainwave to search for the "<"
> character. Seriously, what kind of process would ever use that as a
> problem solving approach? In your case, the solution is in the ebuild
> for acpupsd and it's specific DEPENDs. Now, I'm generally OK with
> looking in ebuilds for real answers and have gotten used to it, but
> ffs I should not have to do that. Well-written software should provide
> that information in it's output, and it shouldn't be hard to get the
> software to do it. Ok, rant over. 


+1 and you dang skippy, pat on the back etc etc etc. 

Dale

:-)  :-)