Re: [gentoo-user] Re: are blocks now "OK" with portage-2.1.6.7 ?

[Allan Gottlieb]

At Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:24:01 -0400 ABCD <en.ABCD@×××××.com> wrote:

> Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>> Gnome-light recently went stable on x86 so my last emerge world produced
>> a long list of packages to merge.  Fine.
>>
>> At the end it says
>>
>> Total: 93 packages (87 upgrades, 4 new, 2 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 223,796 kB
>> Conflict: 3 blocks
>> Portage tree and overlays:
>>  [0] /usr/portage
>>  [?] indicates that the source repository could not be determined
>>
>> Would you like to merge these packages? [Yes/No]
>>
>> Since it offers to merge and there are no B's in the list, I assume
>> this version of portage resolved the blockage.  However, there are
>> nearly a hundred packages and some of them are important so I would like
>> to confirm that it is OK to let portage merge these.
>>
>> thanks,
>> allan
>>
>
> It should be ok, and as there are "3 blocks", you will probably find
> three instances of "[blocks b     ]" (note the lowercase "b"), which are
> automatically resolved (usually) by an "[unmerge      ]" line further
> down (or up, if you are using --tree). This corresponds to the new
> behavior, which automatically fixes problems like the old
> e2fsprogs/com_err/ss/e2fsprogs-libs blocker, without breaking anything
> (well, the system may be in an inconsistent state if you loose power at
> *exactly* the wrong time, but that can happen anyway during a merge,
> even without this new behavior).
>
> PS: I hope I didn't ramble on too much... this was going to be much
> longer, and less coherent.

Thank you and justin.  I did look for the B' (but was looking for
capital B) and didn't find it.  After justin's msg, I let the emerge go
and it has finished successfully.

Thanks again,
allan