Dale <[email protected]> [16-04-17 06:08]: > [email protected] wrote: > > Hi, > > > > ...and the novice was buffled and even the master shifted a little bit > > after recognizing this words of the eternal being named emerge. > > I know, that there is a difference in knowing the path and walking the > > path, but it seems that I am not supposed to understand this: > > > > > > These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order: > > > > Calculating dependencies... done! > > > > Total: 0 packages, Size of downloads: 0 KiB > > > > WARNING: One or more updates/rebuilds have been skipped due to a dependency > > conflict: > > > > dev-util/boost-build:0 > > > > (dev-util/boost-build-1.60.0:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) > > conflicts with > > =dev-util/boost-build-1.58* required by > > (dev-libs/boost-1.58.0-r1:0/1.58.0::gentoo, installed) > > ^ ^^^^^ > > > > > > !!! The following update has been skipped due to unsatisfied dependencies: > > > > dev-libs/boost:0 > > > > !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "=dev-util/boost-build-1.60*" have been > > masked. > > !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your > > request: > > - dev-util/boost-build-1.60.0::gentoo (masked by: ) > > > > > > For me it looks like boost not beeing updated/reinstalled because of > > another version of boost, which depends on boost. > > > > HELP, I need somebody, HELP, not just anybody hee-eee-eelp uuuuuhhhh! > > > > Thanks for any HELP in advance! May the source be with you... > > Best regards, > > Meino > > > > > > > Notice this line. > > =dev-util/boost-build-1.58* required by > (dev-libs/boost-1.58.0-r1:0/1.58.0::gentoo, installed) > ^ ^^^^^ > > Note the ^ and the ^^^^^ part. That seems to be the important part. > Me, I would check package.* files and see if there is a entry for boost > in there. It seems to be pointing out that there is a problem with that > specific version and a = sign somewhere. It could be a keyword that > only applies to that version and it needs a newer version keyworded or > there could be a entry in package.use that has a version attached to > it. I might add, I try not to put versions on packages in package.use. > It just seems to lead to trouble. May want to check package.mask too if > you find nothing in the other files. > > Also a -t might help too. Maybe. > > If that doesn't help, Alan M. will come along with his crystal ball > soon, I hope. > > Dale > > :-) :-) > >
Hi Simon, hi Dale, thanks for your replies ! :) I will check first for package* occurences of boost, since this may be the root of all evil. If nothing helps, I will be back ;) Best regards Meino
