On Tuesday 25 October 2005 01:45, Ferris McCormick wrote: > Well, maybe so. However that missing '<' is kind of important Indeed - and it has nothing to do with modular X. There are other !<foo-N deps in portage.
> , and when > playing with X-modular, the portage output really looks like the modular > packages are blocking the non-existent xorg-x11-7. It's not a "matter of > using portage correctly" because portage is misreporting the (phantom) > problem. > > As I recall, it looks like this (for example): > x11-base/xorg-server-xxx [B x11-base/xorg-x11-7] > which without that little '<' is, shall we say, wrong. Example output from the OP: [blocks B ] <x11-base/xorg-x11-7 (is blocking x11-proto/kbproto-1.0-r1) The < is there, and portage isn't misreporting. You just have to read carefully. > Since (so far as I > know) it arises only in the X-modular context, this is the right place for > the question. (With '<' it's true but irrelevant, but portage is being > misled into believing xorg-x11 is required. R. Hill addressed that issue > in another post.) > > Or maybe it arises elsewhere too? # find /usr/portage -name '*.ebuild' | xargs grep -He '!\w*<' gives lots of results. xorg-x11-7 is probably the only case where the max version being blocked (7) doesn't exist. But that doesn't stop one from understanding the < blocking dep. -- Dan Armak Gentoo Linux developer (KDE) Public GPG key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~danarmak/danarmak-gpg-public.key Fingerprint: DD70 DBF9 E3D4 6CB9 2FDD 0069 508D 9143 8D5F 8951
pgpddJLITyViD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
