| 1 |
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:29:01 -0800, Grant wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>> Is portage supposed to pick up on this with 'emerge -avDuN world'? |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Not if these are build-time dependencies, in which case they'll only be |
| 8 |
>> picked up when you use --with-bdeps y. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> This is becoming a VFAQ. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> -- |
| 14 |
>> Neil Bothwick |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> When this was asked a few weeks ago someone then asked why |
| 17 |
> --with-bdeps Y isn't the default? This seems to burn nearly everyone |
| 18 |
> once in awhile. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
When I asked a similar question, the whole bdeps thing was a red |
| 21 |
herring. The cause in my case was ebuilds changing without having the |
| 22 |
version increased. I guess portage uses the tree vs installed ebuild |
| 23 |
cache depending on what you ask of it. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
For example when I installed foo it did not have bar as a dep, so |
| 26 |
--deep doesn't find it. However, the same version of foo that i have |
| 27 |
installed now includes the dep for bar, so other commands/tools which |
| 28 |
look at the ebuilds in the tree will see it like that (or re-emerging |
| 29 |
foo). Maybe that's not how it works (I'm no portage expert, just a |
| 30 |
average user). |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Back to the OP's exact problem: |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
It looks like it wants to downgrade boost from 1.35.0-r1 down to 1.34.1. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
1.35.0-r2 is testing (~arch) while 1.34.1-2 is stable. Did you |
| 37 |
override arch when emerging? |
Archives