I am total Gentoo newb :D but it seems kind of fundamental to the concept of this distribution that its users are going to make themselves aware of the details of system updates. Short of reading ridiculous amounts of doco...folks should be reading the output of the emerge commands to learn about edge cases like this one.
In the short few days I've been using Gentoo, there have been several occasions where had I not read that output, my system would have been 'broken' on next reboot. At the very least there were additional steps needed for me to install that package I tried to emerge (missing USE flags, requests to rebuild other packages, external data downloads, etc.). Personally, I rather like this approach. The folks maintaining the builds take the time to identify these edge cases, which makes the portage text output quite helpful. -- Matt On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 1:09 PM, b.n. <brullonu...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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. > > > > >
