| 1 |
On Tue, Mar 14 2017, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 14/03/2017 16:43, allan gottlieb wrote: |
| 4 |
>> I update roughly twice a week. On one machine (full output below) I was |
| 5 |
>> told that libinput and evdev are blocking xorg-drivers |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> [blocks B ] <x11-drivers/xf86-input-libinput-0.20.0 |
| 8 |
>> ("<x11-drivers/xf86-input-libinput-0.20.0" is blocking |
| 9 |
>> x11-base/xorg-drivers-1.19) |
| 10 |
>> [blocks B ] <x11-drivers/xf86-input-evdev-2.10.4 |
| 11 |
>> ("<x11-drivers/xf86-input-evdev-2.10.4" is blocking |
| 12 |
>> x11-base/xorg-drivers-1.19) |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> However the merge does propose to update xorg-drivers |
| 15 |
>> [ebuild U ] x11-base/xorg-drivers-1.19 [1.18-r1] VIDEO_CARDS="-ark% |
| 16 |
>> -i915% -i965% (-newport) -sis%" |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> It also proposes to update libinput and evdev |
| 19 |
>> [ebuild U ] x11-drivers/xf86-input-libinput-0.24.0 [0.19.0] |
| 20 |
>> [ebuild U ] x11-drivers/xf86-input-evdev-2.10.5 [2.10.3] |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> I do see that the versions of libinput and evdev to be used are higher |
| 23 |
>> than the versions that would block xorg-drivers. I am wondering why in |
| 24 |
>> this case emerge is telling me about the block (in red with a capital B) |
| 25 |
>> and more importantly would appreciate confirmation that I should let the |
| 26 |
>> emerge proceed. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Portage found a solution that satisfies all constraints, so you should |
| 30 |
> let it proceed. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Did you run emerge with -v to get the above? |
| 33 |
> That looks like portage is doing it's usual -v thing which is to core |
| 34 |
> dump to your console in the hope that maybe you can figure it out and |
| 35 |
> you are willing to play the game called "let's find out what portage |
| 36 |
> thinks it means today!" |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> I don't understand why those blockers are marked hard, as portage found |
| 39 |
> a solution. The blocker lines are really telling you why portage wants |
| 40 |
> to upgrade your libinput and evdev drivers - the current ones won't work |
| 41 |
> with your current drivers. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> Which is all totally pointless, as newer versions of everything are |
| 44 |
> available and you want a full update. There's very little point in |
| 45 |
> software going to great lengths to tell you why it won't keep old |
| 46 |
> versions when you explicitly told it to not keep old versions :-) |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Thank you for the confirmation! I also doubt the use of B when b would |
| 49 |
be appropriated. No this was not a --verbose run. I would guess that |
| 50 |
output would be even less illuminating. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
allan |
Archives