On Dec 20, 2011 2:58 AM, "Allan Gottlieb" <gottl...@nyu.edu> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18 2011, Allan Gottlieb wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 18 2011, Joshua Murphy wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Allan Gottlieb <gottl...@nyu.edu> wrote: > >>> I get dependency problems in my normal update world that I can't > >>> understand. The entire output is below. > >>> > >>> As far as I can tell gnome-2.32.1-r1 (which is installed) is requiring > >>> packages from gnome-3, which must be wrong. I don't see any such > >>> dependencies in the ebuild for gnome-2.32.1-r1 and there is an "official > >>> mask list" (which I am using) for those of us who want to > >>> delay installing gnome-3 for a while. > >>> > >>> My conclusion that gnome-2... is requiring gnome-3 packages (which I > >>> know is wrong) comes from two points in the output below. > >>> > >>> 1. The indenting of the --tree --verbose output seems to say this > >>> (e.g., the first two lines say gnome-2... depends on nautilus-3) > >>> > >>> 2. The comments related to mask changes at the bottom say > >>> evince-3... is required by gnome-2... > >>> > >>> Please help. > >>> thanks, > >>> allan > >> > >> > >> Without doing any digging (I'm 100mi away from my Gentoo boxes and > >> sitting on satellite internet, so SSH is painful), I would presume the > >> packages pulling in those dependencies aren't specifying a maximum > >> version, so it's not that they're "requiring" gnome 3 packages, > >> they're requiring gnome packages and are choosing to use the newest, > >> which happens to be part of 3, meaning the gnome 2 ebuilds would need > >> updated to require version < 3.0 to avoid it automatically, and > >> possibly block on mixing 2 and 3 if the mixing really does give > >> issues. > > > > All the gnome-3 packages are masked (package.mask). > > > > Indeed, at the end of my output (see prev msg) you see recommendations > > from emerge for me to remove some masks. > > > > allan > > It was more subtle than I thought. A big tip from Alexandre Rostovtsev > suggested that the problem might be that some package other than > gnome-base/gnome might be requiring nautilus-3 *OR introspection*. > > Sure enough the new evince was the culprit. I put in a workaround for > today but everything should be fine tomorrow due to ... > > From: Allan Gottlieb <gottl...@nyu.edu> > Subject: Re: [Bug 395173] gnome-light-2.32 shouldn't depend on >=x11-themes/gnome-themes-standard-3.0.2 > To: Alexandre Rostovtsev <tetrom...@gentoo.org> > Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:47:08 -0500 > > On Mon, Dec 19 2011, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > > On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 10:59 -0500, Allan Gottlieb wrote: > >> The equery d command (with depth=2 or depth=30) shows no mention of > >> gnome-3, but *does* show introspection. Specifically > >> > >> app-text/evince-2.32.0-r3 (nautilus ? >=gnome-base/nautilus-2.10[introspection?]) > >> > > Ah, that explains it. > > > > When we unmasked gobject-introspection in August, the introspection > > USE flag was masked on versions of gnome-2 packages that were already > > stable, including on <app-text/evince-2.32.0-r4 and > > <gnome-base/nautilus-2.32.2.1-r2. > > > > Two days ago, evince was bumped to 2.32.0-r4 to fix a crash. > > Therefore, evince-2.32.0-r4 became the first gnome-2 version of evince > > that had introspection unmasked, and it wanted to pull in > > nautilus[introspection]. But the latest gnome-2 version of nautilus in > > portage was nautilus-2.32.2.1-r1, which had introspection masked. > > Therefore, evince-2.32.0-r4 effectively depended on nautilus-3. And > > since nautilus-3 and evince-2.32.0-r4 are both in ~arch, repoman (the > > automatic script that gentoo developers use to check their ebuilds > > before committing) did not catch the problem :( > > > > I have now fixed it by bumping nautilus to 2.32.2.1-r2, and have > > alerted the other gnome team members to be aware of this issue. > > > > Thank you very much for reporting this as soon as you did! > > > > -Alexandre. > > Great. So tomorrow, my resync will find nautilus...-r2 and I will be > able to remove > app-text/evince -introspection > from package.use. > (That is the workaround I put in today to permit an update world to > proceed without gnome-3). >
Cool! A perfect example why we ought to report on bugs. It might save someone else from a teeth-gritting hardship, even when handling a totally unrelated package. Well done, Gentoo-ers :-) Rgds,
