| 1 |
On Saturday 20 May 2017 18:39:07 Kai Krakow wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Sat, 20 May 2017 16:36:08 +0100 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> schrieb Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>: |
| 5 |
> > On Saturday 20 May 2017 10:48:52 Mick wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > On Saturday 20 May 2017 03:19:20 Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > > On Saturday 20 May 2017 00:26:58 Kai Krakow wrote: |
| 8 |
> > [...] |
| 9 |
> > [...] |
| 10 |
> > [...] |
| 11 |
> > [...] |
| 12 |
> > [...] |
| 13 |
> > [...] |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > > > After all that, KMail now works as it did before. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > [...] |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > > > Mick might like to try that, perhaps. I assume the effect will be |
| 20 |
> > > > the same. |
| 21 |
> > > |
| 22 |
> > > Thanks Peter. First PC is going through it. 91 packages! |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> > It seems revdep-rebuild'ing against library='libQtCore.so.4' also |
| 25 |
> > rebuilds the newly installed Qt packages. This is why there so many |
| 26 |
> > packages to rebuild. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> That's why I suggested using "--changed-deps": It doesn't rebuild |
| 29 |
> packages that provide the library itself and have already been built |
| 30 |
> after the library provider... |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> OTOH, it doesn't check binary dependence, just what is written into the |
| 33 |
> ebuilds itself. But it should work most of the time. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> A combination of two emerge invocations may work, too: |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> # emerge -DNua world --changed-deps |
| 38 |
> # emerge -1a @preserved-rebuild --changed-deps |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> This also worked well for me when I did the gcc upgrade. |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> But I think the need to use changed-deps to rebuild dependers should be |
| 43 |
> considered a bug and be reported. Portage has support for sub-slot |
| 44 |
> dependencies to describe such binary breakage during upgrades and |
| 45 |
> automatically rebuild the dependers. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Have you seen https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=595618 ? It says that |
| 48 |
"Qt plugins compiled with gcc-4 are incompatible with <dev-qt/qtcore-4.8.7 |
| 49 |
compiled with gcc-5." I don't see how portage can be expected to anticipate |
| 50 |
that. On the other hand, some kind of notice could be issued, and bug 618922 |
| 51 |
is pursuing that. (That's the one I started this thread with.) |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
-- |
| 54 |
Regards |
| 55 |
Peter |
Archives