Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage vs Qt
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 16:32:29
Message-Id: 2731991.4hz4QkTVRI@dell_xps
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage vs Qt by "J. Roeleveld"
1 On Wednesday 14 Dec 2016 06:48:41 J. Roeleveld wrote:
2 > On Wednesday, December 14, 2016 12:06:00 AM Philip Webb wrote:
3 > > I just updated Qt5 to 5.6.2 & ran into a familiar Portage problem.
4 > >
5 > > The emerge command responds with a list of "conflicts",
6 > > all involving 5.6.1 vs 5.6.2 versions of the c 15 pkgs.
7 > > The only way to get around this is to unmerge the existing pkgs via '-C',
8 > > then install the new versions. That works, but it's brute force.
9 > >
10 > > Portage sb able to resolve this kind of conflict for itself.
11 > > If not, then at least it should advise users intelligently
12 > > to do what I've just described. It can happen with other sets of pkgs.
13 > >
14 > > Yes, I did do 'backtrack==30'.
15 > >
16 > > Before I send in a bug, does anyone else have useful comments ?
17 >
18 > I did exactly the same upgrade on 2 machines, along with an entire plasma
19 > upgrade, and didn't encounter this issue.
20 >
21 > For comparison, this is what I generally use:
22 >
23 > # emerge -vauDN --with-bdeps=y @world
24 > # emerge -va --depclean
25 >
26 > Do you only upgrade subsets? Or the full world?
27 > I found that with libraries like qt, python and similar, only upgrading
28 > those makes it impossible for portage to properly handle the blockers.
29 >
30 > --
31 > Joost
32
33 I came across a similar problem on 4 PCs. From memory the problem was
34 resolved when I manually unmerged dev-qt/qtcore and then updated world with
35 backtrack=90. I did not have to run --with-bdeps=y.
36
37 --
38 Regards,
39 Mick

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage vs Qt "J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org>