| 1 |
Okay, gladly. In fact, I ran it 3 times, one after another, because I wasn't even sure if there were fatal problems or not ... trying to attach these text files... |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
But I'm going to bed then. Good night. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Mai 2019 um 00:38 Uhr |
| 7 |
> Von: "Dale" <rdalek1967@×××××.com> |
| 8 |
> An: gentoo-user@l.g.o |
| 9 |
> Betreff: Re: [gentoo-user] slot conflict when updating portage |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> n952162@×××.de wrote: |
| 12 |
> > !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled |
| 13 |
> > !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict: |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > sys-apps/portage:0 |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > How should I go about handling this? |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > Slot are explained somewhere as allowing multiple packages to have different versions of the same providing package. Why should there be conflicts? Is there a limited number of slots or something? Why is a slot conflict a problem - each dependent package can use its own slot ... |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > Following this message there are a number of "paragraphs", each introduced with a line like the "sys-apps/portage:0" line, above. Each paragraph contains multiple "clauses", apparently representing different versions of the package starting the "paragraph" |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> > Each seems to be terminated with a status: |
| 24 |
> > - argument |
| 25 |
> > - installed |
| 26 |
> > - ebuild scheduled for merge |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> > Where's the problem? |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> > There must be a problem because it goes on to say: |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > "It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to |
| 33 |
> > prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also |
| 34 |
> > possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are |
| 35 |
> > impossible to satisfy simultaneously. If such a conflict exists in |
| 36 |
> > the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can |
| 37 |
> > not be installed simultaneously." |
| 38 |
> > |
| 39 |
> > I can solve the problem by preventing *one* of the packages from being selected? |
| 40 |
> > Let's see, I have 3 such paragraphs, two with 2 clauses each and one with 6 clauses. If I pick one, everything will be fine? |
| 41 |
> > |
| 42 |
> > It then suggests looking at the MASKED PACKAGES section of the emerge man page. But that has to do with experimental or development packages. My profile is "stable" - there's no reason why I should have any of those, is there? |
| 43 |
> > |
| 44 |
> > It goes on, but I think those are other issues which I will raise in a subsequent post. |
| 45 |
> > |
| 46 |
> > |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> You need to post the whole output so others can see what is causing the |
| 50 |
> conflict. There are a few on this list who are very good at parsing the |
| 51 |
> output and finding a way to work through it. |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> Dale |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> :-) :-) |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
Archives