On Sunday 10 May 2009 04:23:25 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > 1. It was a paludis bug, of course paludis --info came in handy (are > you trying to jest? ;p)
It's most likely not a Paludis bug; do you really think that no-one's ever tried to compile Qt4 on amd64 with Paludis until now? I'm guessing a misconfiguration, but we'll have to wait for the real paludis --info output (NOT emerge --info, because that doesn't say anything about the Paludis configuration) to be sure. > 2. You found it useful because you knew the syntax, and where to look > for what -- it is relevant to you. Not to everyone else It's useful and relevant if and only if it contains information that helps diagnose the problem. In the likely event that it's a misconfiguration, that applies to paludis --info, but probably not emerge --info, unless he made the same mistake with both. > 3. Also, last comment on the bug: > > "The emerge --info and paludis --info I reported above are from the wrong > machine. I'll update the results on Monday when I get back to the correct > machine. It is a Xeon W5580 cpu which should be compiling as x86_64. I > believe the bug is real. Sorry for the confusion." > > Oops? =p If anything, that's a point in favour of tanderson's argument. If the --info the user had posted had been right, then both the paludis and emerge output are equally useful, because they both indicate that it isn't an amd64 system at all. On the other hand, if it turns out that on the correct system, Paludis is misconfigured and Portage isn't, then only paludis --info will help.
