1 |
Sorry about previous send with no additions. Bad fingers this |
2 |
afternoon I guess... |
3 |
|
4 |
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
5 |
> "Drake Donahue" <donahue95@×××××××.net> posted |
6 |
> 414A2586925347C7BCFA0A784EC2A8FE@iwillxp333, excerpted below, on Mon, 24 |
7 |
> Nov 2008 12:19:04 -0500: |
8 |
> |
9 |
>> The wisdom of making currently existing and useful packages depend on |
10 |
>> some future incomplete package management system (so that updates become |
11 |
>> arduous and/or impossible)?? Anyone discovered a way to cope with |
12 |
>> 'masked by eapx '? sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc15 did not relieve a 'masked |
13 |
>> by eap2' .... |
14 |
> |
15 |
> It should be 2.2_rc16, now. rc15 has a circular logic bug on unsolved |
16 |
> dependencies. |
17 |
> |
18 |
<SNIP> |
19 |
> |
20 |
> Personally, I default to ~arch, and unmask hard-masked packages either in- |
21 |
> tree or from various overlays from time to time as well. |
22 |
|
23 |
Where do you do this? In /etc/make.conf? I've never run a machine like |
24 |
that but would be interested in at least seeing how many packages this |
25 |
machine would have to rebuild if I went there. |
26 |
|
27 |
Also, when you say '~arch' on this list do you really mean ~amd64, or |
28 |
is there a real ~arch that I've not learned about? |
29 |
|
30 |
Generally I've always run stable and then never shied away from having |
31 |
a larger set of file in my package.keywords file to get what I think I |
32 |
want to run. |
33 |
|
34 |
> But in general, |
35 |
> I'm prepared for them to fail once in awhile, and to spend sometimes |
36 |
> significant time tracing and reporting bugs, then working around them or |
37 |
> rolling back to an earlier version without the bug, should I need the |
38 |
> bugged functionality. But YMMV definitely applies in this area, and |
39 |
> while I'd not be satisfied running what I'd consider long outdated |
40 |
> versions that may be the latest stable in many cases, other people may |
41 |
> prefer that stability even if it does mean being maybe a year behind at |
42 |
> times, possibly even more in some cases. |
43 |
> |
44 |
> -- |
45 |
> Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
46 |
|
47 |
I don't think that running 'stable' anymore really means stable. |
48 |
package management has (IMO, really) gotten rather arbitrary over the |
49 |
last 2 years to the extent that I know of multiple people who have |
50 |
left the distro because stable packages are really broken. It's hard |
51 |
on some people with certain workload models (say a professional |
52 |
recording studio) to run stable, do updates, find new software is |
53 |
broken, and then have to downgrade. Lost time is lost money. I know of |
54 |
at least 4 that have moved onto other prepacked distros in the last |
55 |
year. Disappointing. |
56 |
|
57 |
Anyway, back on topic. I managed to build portage-2.2_rc16 today and |
58 |
now have the option of building ardour-2.7. Not sure I'm gonna do it |
59 |
though as I then have 2 files blocking, one having to do with Gnome |
60 |
itself and I had to unmask a whole boatload of packages to get to the |
61 |
point that I found that: |
62 |
|
63 |
media-sound/ardour ~amd64 |
64 |
media-sound/jack-audio-connection-kit ~amd64 |
65 |
media-libs/aubio ~amd64 |
66 |
dev-cpp/gtkmm ~amd64 |
67 |
dev-cpp/glibmm ~amd64 |
68 |
dev-libs/glib ~amd64 |
69 |
dev-cpp/pangomm ~amd64 |
70 |
x11-libs/gtk+ ~amd64 |
71 |
x11-libs/pango ~amd64 |
72 |
x11-libs/cairo ~amd64 |
73 |
x11-libs/pixman ~amd64 |
74 |
|
75 |
|
76 |
lightning ~ # emerge -pvDuN world |
77 |
|
78 |
These are the packages that would be merged, in order: |
79 |
|
80 |
Calculating dependencies... done! |
81 |
|
82 |
<SNIP> |
83 |
|
84 |
[blocks b ] <dev-cpp/gtkmm-2.13:2.4 ("<dev-cpp/gtkmm-2.13:2.4" is |
85 |
blocking dev-cpp/pangomm-2.14.1) |
86 |
[blocks B ] <gnome-base/gail-1000 ("<gnome-base/gail-1000" is |
87 |
blocking x11-libs/gtk+-2.14.4) |
88 |
|
89 |
Total: 10 packages (9 upgrades, 1 new), Size of downloads: 46,253 kB |
90 |
Conflict: 2 blocks (1 unsatisfied) |
91 |
lightning ~ # |
92 |
|
93 |
Not sure this is worth the effort, at least until the weekend maybe. |
94 |
|
95 |
Thanks for your help. At least I got past the issue with portage. |
96 |
|
97 |
Cheers, |
98 |
Mark |