On Friday 03 Feb 2017 22:00:11 Dale wrote: > Jörg Schaible wrote: > > Dale wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > >> Portage lock? Sometimes, my brain does that too. lol > > > > Hehe. > > > >> I thought about it after I hit send but figured you would get the > >> thought, maybe you had one or the other in a mask/unmask file or > >> something that resulted in a conflict? I was sort of thinking it but > >> didn't type it in for some reason. Still, if you did the same command I > >> posted, you would have seen the difference and thought on it. Generally > >> if there is a difference like that, it's because of a local setting, or > >> a change in the tree due to different sync time, which would give the > >> idea of syncing again. > > > > Again the same issue on another box: > > > > =============== %< ================== > > $ equery l -p boost boost-build > > > > * Searching for boost ... > > > > [-P-] [ ] dev-libs/boost-1.55.0-r2:0/1.55.0 > > [IP-] [ ] dev-libs/boost-1.56.0-r1:0/1.56.0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-libs/boost-1.58.0-r1:0/1.58.0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-libs/boost-1.59.0:0/1.59.0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-libs/boost-1.60.0:0/1.60.0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-libs/boost-1.61.0:0/1.61.0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-libs/boost-1.61.0-r1:0/1.61.0 > > [-P-] [ ] dev-libs/boost-1.62.0-r1:0/1.62.0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-libs/boost-1.63.0:0/1.63.0 > > > > * Searching for boost-build ... > > > > [-P-] [ ] dev-util/boost-build-1.55.0:0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-util/boost-build-1.55.0-r1:0 > > [IP-] [ ] dev-util/boost-build-1.56.0:0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-util/boost-build-1.58.0:0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-util/boost-build-1.59.0:0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-util/boost-build-1.60.0:0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-util/boost-build-1.61.0:0 > > [-P-] [ ] dev-util/boost-build-1.62.0-r1:0 > > [-P-] [ ~] dev-util/boost-build-1.63.0:0 > > =============== %< ================== > > > > Portage should be capable of an update. > > > >> Anyway, glad it is going. That's what matters. > > > > Yep, glad that I have a solution for it now. > > > > - Jörg > > That is really weird. That looks like exactly the same output I have > and mine updated just fine. At least, I don't recall having issues. I > read a couple other posts where people were having to run the same > command more than once to get portage to find a upgrade path. I wonder, > does emerge/portage/tree have a hiccup somewhere? Is this a bug that > hasn't quite had a finger put on it?? > > Weird. > > Dale > > :-) :-)
From what I have seen when there are two stable versions of the same package, portage needs to be told which one to install. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
