Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Cc: "Sebastian Beßler" <sebastian@××××××××××××.de>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage autounmask is strange again
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 19:36:00
Message-Id: 2353720.0zyCrGIGVy@nazgul
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage autounmask is strange again by "Sebastian Beßler"
1 On Mon 15 August 2011 20:55:12 Sebastian Beßler did opine thusly:
2 > Am 15.08.2011 20:02, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
3 > > It's not a bug, portage is doing what it should.
4 > >
5 > > In the first case portage will try upgrade all packages to the
6 > > latest version. It sees that you asked it to try autounmask
7 > > stuff, so it wants to override your local mask for
8 > > ExtUtils-ParseXS.
9 >
10 > I don't asked portage to autounmask anything, that is a feature of
11 > portage-2.2 and should normaly only fire when there is a need to
12 > unmask (or change USE or change keyword) anything to fullfill the
13 > needs of the packages to be installed or updated.
14 >
15 > Else it would tell anyone on stable who use portage-2.2 to change to
16 > ~unstable because there is newer stuff to install. I have a large
17 > amount on packages that have newer versions that are masked and
18 > autounmask doesn't ask me to install them only because they are
19 > newer.
20 > > In the second case you have told portage to upgrade system and
21 > > world but to leave masking well enough alone. As your current
22 > > installed version of ExtUtils-ParseXS satisfies all needs, it
23 > > makes no effort to try and upgrade it.
24 >
25 > I think that you not really know what the autounmask-feature of
26 > portage-2.2 is all about.
27 >
28 > Normally it does something like this:
29 >
30 > emerge =perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 -vp
31 >
32 > These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
33 >
34 > Calculating dependencies ... done!
35 > [ebuild U ] perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 [2.22.06] 0 kB
36 >
37 > Total: 1 package (1 upgrade), Size of downloads: 0 kB
38 >
39 > The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
40 > #required by =perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 (argument)
41 >
42 > >=perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 ~amd64
43 >
44 > NOTE: This --autounmask behavior can be disabled by setting
45 > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--autounmask=n" in make.conf.
46 >
47 > without it would look like this:
48 >
49 > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--autounmask=n" emerge
50 > =perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0 -vp
51 >
52 > These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
53 >
54 > Calculating dependencies ... done!
55 >
56 > !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy
57 > "=perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0" have been masked.
58 > !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete
59 > your request:
60 > - perl-core/ExtUtils-ParseXS-3.20.0::gentoo (masked by: ~amd64
61 > keyword)
62 >
63 > For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge
64 > man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
65 >
66 > It is just a other way to display what is needed to be done. If
67 > autounmask fires portage should throw an error too if trying the
68 > same thing again with autounmask=n. But here it doesn't. It tells
69 > me to unmaks without any need.
70
71 Do you have autounmask enabled or disabled in your config for portage?
72
73 That first example you gave strongly indicates you have it enabled.
74
75
76 >
77 > > The trick to working with autounmask is to realise that it is
78 > > stupid software, it cannot possibly know what you want or
79 > > intend. So it tries a blanket approach for the most part. If
80 > > you have more complex masking than just stable/unstable
81 > > statistically it will be wrong far more often than it is right.
82 >
83 > If there is a package version masked and nothing needs that version
84 > then autounmask should not fire. It should leave that alone.
85 >
86 > For me it still looks like a bug.
87 >
88 > Greetings
89 >
90 > Sebastian
91 --
92 alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage autounmask is strange again Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage autounmask is strange again "Sebastian Beßler" <sebastian@××××××××××××.de>