On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Dutch Ingraham <s...@gmx.us> wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 03:17 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>
>> On 04/06/14 20:11, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>> On 06/04/2014 07:22 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote:
>>>> Am 04.06.2014 06:05, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>>>>> On 04/06/14 05:17, Dutch Ingraham wrote:
>>>>>> No, "sys-fs/udev" is not masked, but an update is indicated in the
>>>>>> emerge above. That's a good catch, the MATE stuff is from the overlay.
>>>>>> Unfortunately, the xfce stuff is not, so even if the overlay currency
>>>>>> was an issue, I'll still be showing some dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Try re-emerging on un-emerging the offending packages, like
>>>>> xfce4-session and xfce4-power-manager,
>>>>> it has helped some people, to refresh the .ebuild copy that is installed
>>>>> with the .ebuild copy from
>>>>> Portage
>>>>>
>>>>> - Samuli
>>>>>
>>>> Thanks - that fixed it for me:
>>>>
>>>> # emerge -C xfce-base/xfce4-session xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager
>>>> xfce-extra/xfce4-systemload-plugin
>>>> # emerge -uND xfce-base/xfce4-meta xfce-extra/xfce4-power-manager
>>>> xfce-extra/xfce4-systemload-plugin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Greetings
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>> Unfortunately, this doesn't work for me. So let me re-cap: I have
>>>
>>> 4. masked virtual/udev-208-r2; that has not worked.
>>
>> First, remove that mask. Masking it will certainly cause more blockers,
>> than solve them.
>>
>>> [ebuild N ~] mate-extra/mate-power-manager-1.6.3::mate-overlay
>>> USE="applet policykit -gnome-keyring -man {-test}" 0 kB
>>> [ebuild N ~] mate-base/mate-session-manager-1.6.1-r1::mate-overlay
>>> USE="ipv6 -debug -systemd" 0 kB
>>>
>>
>> see "::mate-overlay", it's presumably broken or outdated. stop using the
>> overlay and use MATE from Portage instead.
>> or you can mask the packages from overlay, the syntax is like:
>>
>> /etc/portage/package.mask
>>
>> mate-extra/mate-power-manager::mate-overlay
>> mate-base/mate-session-manager::mate-overlay
>>
>> - Samuli
>>
>>
>
> Thanks everybody for your help. I've made the further suggested
> changes, but I remain with the three hard blocks.
>
> I've now spent about 7 hours over the last two days on this issue (about
> 2x the fresh install time), when all I wanted to do was a routine
> update. I've reworked a large part of my system, adding a new
> package.mask file and populating it with six packages.
>
> I suppose its now time for an uninstall. Kind of disappointing; we are
> told Gentoo is about choices, and in fact that's true. I made the
> choice to use a pure openRC system. The last 7 hours of free time,
> though, was spent trying, and ultimately failing, to correct a problem
> not chosen, not wanted, and not invited.
>
> The sine qua non is unarguably systemd. Even though my choice was to
> not deploy it, apparently it takes a significant time commitment and/or
> developer-level knowledge to choose to not use it. Quite the inelegant
> end to my once-trusty OS.
>
You are right, all I can say is that I am sorry we treat users like
that. We forget that our task is to ease deployment of upstream
projects to end users. What we experience is only the start of the
mess of having two separate contradictory layouts within stable tree,
without decent profile setups to protect users from pulling layout
they are not interested in.
Alon
