Volker Armin Hemmann ha scritto: > On Donnerstag 01 Januar 2009, Michael P. Soulier wrote: >> On 01/01/09 Volker Armin Hemmann said: >>> after the emerge you read the messages with elogv and downgrade. No harm >>> done. >> I'll be sure to try that, thank you. However, would not avoiding a bad >> upgrade in the first place be a better-behaved tool? Especially when the >> package in question "knew" that it was likely incompatible? >> >> I'm not saying that this could not be avoided with more work, I'm saying >> that I shouldn't have to if the tools were better behaved. >> >> Cheers, >> Mike > > how should 'the tool' know what card you are using?
The tool knew -in fact it told him of the breakage , *after* doing it. > and even if portage could > parse lspci output - why make it slower and more easily to break if all > breakage can be avoided by simply reading first - then upgrading? If you don't know there's something to read... > Do you > always install the latest drivers without reading up on them first? Usually, yes. Could be my fault, but am I expected to read technical docs everytime I update a package? Anyway, the system *knows* that there's a problem, so your point is moot. The only thing we're asking is to warn and stop *before* and not *after*. > Nvidia's 'deprecation' strategy is a pain in the ass and they are doing it > for > a long time now. So this time it bit you. Next time it will be 6XXX card > users, then 7XXX card users and so on. That is why you have to go to nvnews > first and then upgrade. Not the other way round. Thanks for advice. m.
