| 1 |
Yeah, but it should show the version that it's actually upgrading, not the |
| 2 |
version that's in a different SLOT. Maybe I'll take a look at the Portage |
| 3 |
code, and come up with a patch later. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Jon Portnoy said: |
| 6 |
> Recent versions of Portage will show UD for packages that're actually |
| 7 |
> going to be downgraded and just U when they're in different SLOTs, I |
| 8 |
> think. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 09:56:52AM -0700, Matthew Walker wrote: |
| 11 |
>> Then I'd like to propose a new feature for portage. ;) |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> There is no visual indication in the output of emerge -pu world that |
| 14 |
>> tells me those are in different slots. And since I apparently still have |
| 15 |
>> a 1.4 panel version installed, shouldn't it show /that/ as the package |
| 16 |
>> it's upgrading? |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> Jon Portnoy said: |
| 19 |
>> > It's safe. They're in different SLOTs. |
| 20 |
>> > |
| 21 |
>> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 09:50:13AM -0700, Matthew Walker wrote: |
| 22 |
>> >> Is there some reason gnome-panel wants to downgrade from version |
| 23 |
>> 2.2.1 to version 1.4.2-r2? Is it safe to let it downgrade? |
| 24 |
>> >> |
| 25 |
>> >> I've been avoiding letting portage 'update' gnome-panel for a while |
| 26 |
>> now, but I'm getting tired of it, and want to know what I should do. |
| 27 |
>> >> |
| 28 |
>> >> Matthew |
| 29 |
>> >> |
| 30 |
>> >> |
| 31 |
>> >> |
| 32 |
>> >> -- |
| 33 |
>> >> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 34 |
>> > |
| 35 |
>> > -- |
| 36 |
>> > Jon Portnoy |
| 37 |
>> > |
| 38 |
>> > -- |
| 39 |
>> > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
>> |
| 42 |
>> |
| 43 |
>> |
| 44 |
>> -- |
| 45 |
>> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> -- |
| 48 |
> Jon Portnoy |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> -- |
| 51 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives