| 1 |
On Monday 30 June 2008, brullo nulla wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Seems a reasonable question, but will be almost impossible to |
| 3 |
> > implement, as how would you define a package that can "be happily |
| 4 |
> > merged independently" of a blocking package? |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > portage is software, it isn't intelligent so it doesn't know how to |
| 7 |
> > answer that. I admit it's annoying though. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> The block will in many cases affect only a branch of the dependency |
| 10 |
> tree. For example, in this case it is all blocked because glibmm |
| 11 |
> wants a masked glib. Portage knows that glibmm wants the masked glib, |
| 12 |
> so it knows that glibmm causes the trouble. So it could in principle |
| 13 |
> give me what is to update except for glibmm and glib - and give me |
| 14 |
> the error about those two. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Am I missing something? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Probably not :-) |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
But the portage code has been described as difficult to maintain, so I |
| 21 |
suppose the correct person to ask is Zac himself. Perhaps there are |
| 22 |
tricky edge cases? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 26 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives