On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 11:18 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Saturday 08 April 2006 07:36, Ned Ludd wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 14:19 -0400, solar wrote: > > > FEATURES="buildpkg" ROOT=/ emerge gcc > > > rm -rf /dev/shm/foo > > > > > > ROOT=/dev/shm/foo emerge gcc -pvK > > > > > > Notice how it selects the incorrect deps? > > > IE: eselect cuz it's the first listed dep in the || ( ) vs the > > > gcc-config > > > > + When you already have a copy of gcc-config installed on / and in > > .tbz2 format in ${PKGDIR}/All and no eselect anywhere. > > This should work. I believed I had fixed it by adding the use_binaries > parameter and code paths to dep_zapdeps. If it's not working then there must > be a bug left somewhere.
Must be a bug left somewhere then. I just tested with Portage 2.1_pre7-r4 and the result is the same. > Having a quick look at the dep_zapdeps function, I can't see what but I think > I've discovered another bug. If use_binaries is true, porttree isn't checked > for matches which means that it'll fall through to the "last resort" code > when there's no matching binaries which could end up selecting an atom that > only has masked porttree matches. yikes. > Hmm, there could be a problem the other way too. If there is a binary package > of a masked package and -k (rather than -K) is used, the binary package might > still be chosen. Either way, I'll do some tests and figure out what's not > working. Thanks I/we* appreciate that Jason. If you want me to attempt to file a bug for this I can try but I probably wont do it justice. -- Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list