| 1 |
On 25/07/2014 11:54, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 11:12:26 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>>> !!! The following update(s) have been skipped due to unsatisfied |
| 5 |
>>> dependencies |
| 6 |
>>> !!! triggered by backtracking: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> net-libs/libpcap:0 |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> It means you got tripped up by portage's New! Improved! Awesome! |
| 12 |
>> internal invisible magic. Subslots started it all and portage has to |
| 13 |
>> wade through tons of cruft to figure out the entire dependency tree. In |
| 14 |
>> a nutshell, it keeps searching deeper and deeper until it finds an |
| 15 |
>> answer that works, or until it hits a threshold. When it hits that |
| 16 |
>> threshold, portage exits and says it went as far as it should and has |
| 17 |
>> now given up. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> And in true portage tradition it tells you in a way that is factually |
| 20 |
> accurate yet totally uninformative unless you already understand what |
| 21 |
> happened. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
portage has always suffered badly from Prime Error #1 in interface design: |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
1. Never expose the underlying implementation in the interface |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 34 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives