| 1 |
"Mark Haney" <mhaney@××××××××××××.org> posted |
| 2 |
494FE6D7.2060408@××××××××××××.org, excerpted below, on Mon, 22 Dec 2008 |
| 3 |
14:13:27 -0500: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> I've been updating my system after having some surgery and taking time |
| 6 |
> off from everything and I've noticed a funny thing. Certain packages are |
| 7 |
> requiring that I install v2.1.4.5 or portage (I'm running 2.1.6.2 now) |
| 8 |
> before updating the other packages. Why is that? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
So you're saying they're asking you to downgrade? Do you have an example |
| 11 |
and is it in the main tree or some overlay (which)? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I /think/ that'd be a bug as to date portage has been backward compatible |
| 14 |
such that new versions should handle old ebuilds just fine, but I can't |
| 15 |
say for sure without an example to look at the code on and see what it's |
| 16 |
actually trying to do, where and why. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
What I suspect is happening is that it's depending on a specific portage |
| 19 |
version, say =2.1.4*, instead of a slot, which portage should support |
| 20 |
everything at least in the main tree. IOW it shouldn't be happening in |
| 21 |
the main tree. However, it could still be occurring in some obscure |
| 22 |
overlay that doesn't get much testing from ~portage, maybe one that has |
| 23 |
mostly paludis or pkgcore users? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
But it's all speculation until there's an example to look at, and the |
| 26 |
problem sounds strange enough I'm doubting I'm reading what you said |
| 27 |
correctly in the first place. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 31 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 32 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives