| 1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:53 on Friday 10 September 2010, Hilco |
| 2 |
Wijbenga did opine thusly: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Hi all, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> This morning I got |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> centaur ~ # emerge -vDuNp world |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Calculating dependencies... done! |
| 13 |
> <snip/> |
| 14 |
> [ebuild UD] kde-base/pykde4-4.5.1 [4.5.1-r1] USE="semantic-desktop |
| 15 |
> (-aqua) -debug -doc -examples (-kdeenablefinal) (-kdeprefix)" 0 kB |
| 16 |
> [1=>0] |
| 17 |
> <snip/> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Total: 9 packages (7 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 1 reinstall), Size of |
| 20 |
> downloads: 10,550 kB |
| 21 |
> Portage tree and overlays: |
| 22 |
> [0] /usr/portage |
| 23 |
> [1] /var/lib/layman/kde |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> I decided that I did not want to go back to 4.5.1 so I added |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> =kde-base/pykde4-4.5.1 |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> to /etc/portage/package.mask. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> To my utmost surprise, I got the exact same result as before when |
| 32 |
> running the above emerge command again. I tried it with one of the |
| 33 |
> other upgrades mentioned and package.mask had the expected result. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> So I'm confused. Why is package.mask not having any (apparent) effect |
| 36 |
> for pykde4? How do I prevent the downgrade? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Do you have the same entry in package.unmask? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
unmask supercedes mask |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives