On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Samuli Suominen <ssuomi...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On 17/09/14 16:16, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Samuli Suominen <ssuomi...@gentoo.org> >> wrote: >>> On 17/09/14 03:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >>>> On 09/16/2014 03:14 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >>>>> For some reason xfce-power-manager-1.3.1 does not satisfy what the local >>>>> install needs but 1.3.0 does. So portage wants to make it so. >>>>> >>>> Version 1.3.1 was removed from the tree, leaving only 1.3.0 to satisfy >>>> XFCE_PLUGINS=battery/brightness. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> That's not it. Portage doesn't work like that. >>> >>> It's because he specifically keyworded 1.3.1 in package.keywords, >>> instead using something smart like: >>> >>> <xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager-9999 >>> >>> To get latest non-live version. >>> >> I'm not necessarily after the most recent non-live version of the package. >> I just didn't want lvm2 pulled in as my current setup has no use for it. >> >> What would you recommend doing, leave things as they are, or keyword >> the stanza you suggested? >> >> Thanks. >> > > Notice that I said "_non_-live" and the "<" char in the line. I would > use the stanza (as you said) > because if 1.4.0 is not stabilized before something like 1.4.1 is added > to tree, and 1.4.0 gets > deleted, you are facing the same problem all over again. > As in, <xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager-9999 with the < means "I want > latest non-live version." >
Understood. Thanks.
