1 |
!!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled |
2 |
!!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict: |
3 |
|
4 |
sys-apps/portage:0 |
5 |
|
6 |
How should I go about handling this? |
7 |
|
8 |
Slot are explained somewhere as allowing multiple packages to have different versions of the same providing package. Why should there be conflicts? Is there a limited number of slots or something? Why is a slot conflict a problem - each dependent package can use its own slot ... |
9 |
|
10 |
Following this message there are a number of "paragraphs", each introduced with a line like the "sys-apps/portage:0" line, above. Each paragraph contains multiple "clauses", apparently representing different versions of the package starting the "paragraph" |
11 |
|
12 |
Each seems to be terminated with a status: |
13 |
- argument |
14 |
- installed |
15 |
- ebuild scheduled for merge |
16 |
|
17 |
Where's the problem? |
18 |
|
19 |
There must be a problem because it goes on to say: |
20 |
|
21 |
"It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to |
22 |
prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also |
23 |
possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are |
24 |
impossible to satisfy simultaneously. If such a conflict exists in |
25 |
the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can |
26 |
not be installed simultaneously." |
27 |
|
28 |
I can solve the problem by preventing *one* of the packages from being selected? |
29 |
Let's see, I have 3 such paragraphs, two with 2 clauses each and one with 6 clauses. If I pick one, everything will be fine? |
30 |
|
31 |
It then suggests looking at the MASKED PACKAGES section of the emerge man page. But that has to do with experimental or development packages. My profile is "stable" - there's no reason why I should have any of those, is there? |
32 |
|
33 |
It goes on, but I think those are other issues which I will raise in a subsequent post. |