On Thursday 23 August 2007, a tiny voice compelled Abraham Marín Pérez to write: > Ernie Schroder escribió: > > On Wednesday 22 August 2007, a tiny voice compelled Ernie Schroder to write: > >> On Wednesday 22 August 2007, a tiny voice compelled James Ausmus to write: > >>> emerge -ptv kino > >> > >> nothing that helps me here that I see > >> $ emerge -ptv kino > >> > >> These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order: > >> > >> Calculating dependencies... done! > >> [ebuild N ] media-video/kino-1.0.0 USE="alsa dvdr quicktime > >> vorbis -gpac -sox" 5,301 kB > >> [ebuild N ] media-sound/rawrec-0.9.98 60 kB > >> [ebuild N ] media-video/dvdauthor-0.6.11 282 kB > >> [ebuild N ] media-libs/libiec61883-1.1.0 USE="-examples" 359 kB > >> [ebuild N ] media-libs/libdv-1.0.0-r2 USE="sdl xv -debug" 571 kB > >> [ebuild N ] media-video/ffmpeg-0.4.9_p20070616-r1 USE="X encode > >> mmx ogg oss sdl truetype vorbis zlib -a52 -aac > >> (-altivec) -amr -debug -doc -ieee1394 -imlib -network -test -theora > >> -threads -v4l -x264 -xvid" 0 kB > >> [blocks B ] >media-video/ffmpeg-0.4.9_p20070525 (is blocking > >> media-video/kino-1.0.0) > >> > >> Total: 6 packages (6 new, 1 block), Size of downloads: 6,571 kB > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, Ernie > > > > So exactly how do I convince portage that the blocking ffmpeg is NOT > > installed > > Taking a look at the ebuild I saw this in the DEPEND list: > >=media-video/ffmpeg-0.4.9_p20061016 > > !>media-video/ffmpeg-0.4.9_p20070525 > > Portage seems to look for a version later than 0.4.9_p20061016 in order > to satisfy the first condition and finds 0.4.9_p20070616-r1; however, > then it sees version must not be older than 0.4.9_p20070525 and it > > fails... simply add the following line to /etc/portage/packages.mask: > >media-video/ffmpeg-0.4.9_p20070525
Very nice work there Abraham! > > and you'll be able to install kino-1.0.0 with no problem. > > What I wonder now is, shouldn't Portage itself have detected this issue > and choose a version between 0.4.9_p20061016 and 0.4.9_p20070525? Would > this be a Portage bug? maybe portage is dyslexic, like me and recognised 0.4.9_p20061016 as 0.4.9_p20070616. One would think it's either a bug or a syntax problem in the ebuild. Thanks for your detective work! > > Abraham -- Regards, Ernie -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list