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 AF0C8138359 for ; Thu, 7 May 2020 03:50:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6DAC8E0974; Thu, 7 May 2020 03:50:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-40141.protonmail.ch (mail-40141.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.141]) (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 EA271E0965 for ; Thu, 7 May 2020 03:50:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 07 May 2020 03:50:41 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1588823447; bh=z6Lta03scfj3JY+m8ql01yTd4zaeYXH377FhvRemrfM=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=kEsjOsIQkJeuwkFqVlxU7qFnv078//UDNNmt2NFop07s11+pdX6xndHL6WgIout3g BGPb0cKzqVjCRy0mT3EGah9gQHSK+n3qykudJd7Mqe8IQ4fSJgUAWa2VCwhujj7Zxi IXsD0/AtlXZ6bs8VFX4eTKgbBAnkInuTRyjH+LMw= To: "gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org" From: Caveman Al Toraboran Subject: Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20200421165803.GB187193@redacted> <18ef0b9b-97b8-54e2-4c0e-966ab2099c69@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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=7.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM shortcircuit=no autolearn=disabled version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on mail.protonmail.ch X-Archives-Salt: 57592875-3f32-479d-b0ce-0255e0782a06 X-Archives-Hash: eee98fe94b89304c004ef06d349baf71 On Thursday, May 7, 2020 7:31 AM, Dale wrote: > Rich Freeman wrote: > > OP, odds are the emerge failure is what triggered the problem.=C2=A0 If i= t had > completed without failure, it would likely have been a clean update.= =C2=A0 This is > why I set up a chroot and do my updates there and use the -k option to > install on my actual system.=C2=A0 It takes very little time and so far, = no > breakages on my real system.=C2=A0 If any thing fails, it's more likely t= o be in > the chroot which won't hurt anything. If you able, may be a option worth > thinking about for yourself as well.=C2=A0 > > Dale > > :-)=C2=A0 :-) ya. i said it already. emerge's update failed with some package midways (some package needed some USE flag change), but then layman stopped working in this incomplete state. also the issue was simple. but i pointed out that the inconvenience of having a fancy dependency on a pms is still there.