Okay, gladly. In fact, I ran it 3 times, one after another, because I wasn't even sure if there were fatal problems or not ... trying to attach these text files...
But I'm going to bed then. Good night. > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Mai 2019 um 00:38 Uhr > Von: "Dale" <rdalek1...@gmail.com> > An: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > Betreff: Re: [gentoo-user] slot conflict when updating portage > > n952...@web.de wrote: > > !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled > > !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict: > > > > sys-apps/portage:0 > > > > How should I go about handling this? > > > > Slot are explained somewhere as allowing multiple packages to have > > different versions of the same providing package. Why should there be > > conflicts? Is there a limited number of slots or something? Why is a slot > > conflict a problem - each dependent package can use its own slot ... > > > > Following this message there are a number of "paragraphs", each introduced > > with a line like the "sys-apps/portage:0" line, above. Each paragraph > > contains multiple "clauses", apparently representing different versions of > > the package starting the "paragraph" > > > > Each seems to be terminated with a status: > > - argument > > - installed > > - ebuild scheduled for merge > > > > Where's the problem? > > > > There must be a problem because it goes on to say: > > > > "It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to > > prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also > > possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are > > impossible to satisfy simultaneously. If such a conflict exists in > > the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can > > not be installed simultaneously." > > > > I can solve the problem by preventing *one* of the packages from being > > selected? > > Let's see, I have 3 such paragraphs, two with 2 clauses each and one with 6 > > clauses. If I pick one, everything will be fine? > > > > It then suggests looking at the MASKED PACKAGES section of the emerge man > > page. But that has to do with experimental or development packages. My > > profile is "stable" - there's no reason why I should have any of those, is > > there? > > > > It goes on, but I think those are other issues which I will raise in a > > subsequent post. > > > > > > > You need to post the whole output so others can see what is causing the > conflict. There are a few on this list who are very good at parsing the > output and finding a way to work through it. > > Dale > > :-) :-) > >
emerge-0.out
Description: Binary data
emerge-1.out
Description: Binary data
emerge-2.out
Description: Binary data
