From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LLdMj-0002mG-6a for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:55:01 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0857FE02B2; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:55:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D52D2E02B2 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DBC6645C0 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:59 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.521 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.521 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.078, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RGc37m7eGszc for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E42649F9 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LLdMU-0006pl-QN for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:46 +0000 Received: from athedsl-364415.home.otenet.gr ([87.202.151.76]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:46 +0000 Received: from realnc by athedsl-364415.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:54:46 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Trouble with portage Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:54:12 +0200 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <49687C91.8040500@alice.it> <496882A5.70306@allenjb.me.uk> <87r63bcoqk.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk> 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-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-364415.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090101) In-Reply-To: <87r63bcoqk.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 9230419c-373f-4e64-9905-26d1adc162d8 X-Archives-Hash: fe93b5ddc0a5f975242daa403e4c05e6 Graham Murray wrote: > AllenJB writes: > >> First of all, a tip: If a portage upgrade is available, do "emerge >> portage" first. New versions of portage often have new or improved >> features - in this case portage 2.1.6 includes, among other things, >> the ability to automatically handle most blockers. > > Though even the portage2.2 pre-releases do not handle all the cases that > should be able to be handled automatically. An example is one which > encountered yesterday - foo-x-y-z was already installed and foo-x-y+1-0 > was available for update. There are already installed packages which > have (R)DEPEND="=foo-x.y*" and others with (R)DEPEND=">=foo-x.0.0". So > the already installed foo-x.y.z satisfies all the depends, but the new > foo-x.y+1.0 does not. Yet 'emerge -auDv world' flagged a conflict of > trying to install two versions of an unslotted package - when the > 'obvious' resolution would be keep the already installed version and not > upgrade rather than requiring the user to manually mask the new > version. I disagree with you because when I tell emerge to update, it should update rather then not update :P