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 1Mh7a9-0001Qy-FP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:57:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 286ECE08EA for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:07:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A973E09C7 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:04:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB5CC67A05 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:04:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.219 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.219 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.620, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 hv0DFc+RSIvJ for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:04:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 505E1679A8 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:04:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Mg3C3-0006lg-9d for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:04:39 +0200 Received: from mn-69-34-67-62.sta.embarqhsd.net ([69.34.67.62]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:04:39 +0200 Received: from grant.b.edwards by mn-69-34-67-62.sta.embarqhsd.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:04:39 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Grant Edwards Subject: [gentoo-user] Why does emerge want to downgrade firefox/xul-runner? Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:04:12 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: 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=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: mn-69-34-67-62.sta.embarqhsd.net User-Agent: slrn/pre0.9.9-102 (Linux) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 5ef53a58-b923-4c9d-b4a9-e3b5711c05c4 X-Archives-Hash: f66fac4b294aa50a198fbb01a42b63eb Last week on all my systems emerge upgraded firefox (3.5.2-r1) and xul-runner (1.9.1.2-r2). Now it's decided it wants to downgrade all of them to 3.0.13 and 1.9.0.13. Looking at the package database page, I see that firefox 3.5.2-r1 is marked as unstable (~x86). Same for xulrunner 1.3.1.2-r1. That explains why emerge wants to downgrade to the stable version: I don't have ~x86 unmasked for firefox/xulrunner and never have had. What I don't understand is why they got upgraded last week. Were firefox 3.5.2 and xulrunner 1.9.1.2 marked as stable last week and then changed back to unstable this week? -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Jesus is my POSTMASTER at GENERAL ... visi.com