| 1 |
On 31/08/2015 18:54, covici@××××××××××.com wrote: |
| 2 |
>> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-) |
| 3 |
>> > |
| 4 |
>> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the |
| 5 |
>> > true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this: |
| 6 |
>> > |
| 7 |
>> > RDEPEND=" |
| 8 |
>> > ... |
| 9 |
>> > systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| ( |
| 10 |
>> > dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}] |
| 11 |
>> > sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}] |
| 12 |
>> > |
| 13 |
>> > |
| 14 |
>> > I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in |
| 15 |
>> > the way. What are your results for: |
| 16 |
>> > |
| 17 |
>> > emerge --info |
| 18 |
>> > grep -r python /etc/portage |
| 19 |
>> > grep -r systemd /etc/portage |
| 20 |
> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by |
| 21 |
> portage, certainly the systemd one. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I'm having a hard time figuring out what is making portage do this. |
| 25 |
I also figure you're OK with a downgraded systemd meanwhile, but just |
| 26 |
for kicks, lets test my theory: If you run this, does portage offer to |
| 27 |
upgrade systemd? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
USE="-python" emerge -pv systemd |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 34 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives