Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 13624 - use of '!<' in dependency in gtkhtml-1.1.7-r1
Summary: use of '!<' in dependency in gtkhtml-1.1.7-r1
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Linux Gnome Desktop Team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 13674 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2003-01-10 03:49 UTC by John Enok Vollestad
Modified: 2003-01-24 14:35 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description John Enok Vollestad 2003-01-10 03:49:29 UTC
Cant find anything about the "!" operator in the ebuild documentation.   This
stops the merge of evolution-1.2.1:

# emerge -bn evolution
Calculating dependencies ...done!

!!! Error: the <net-mail/evolution-1.2.0 package conflicts with this package and
both can't be installed on the same system together.


If the operator is changed to ">=" it merges evolution-1.2.1 without problems. 
Not sure if this is valid in all circumstances since the operators are not
exactly the same.



*** gtkhtml-1.1.7-r1.ebuild     Wed Jan  8 18:53:19 2003
--- gtkhtml-1.1.7-r1.ebuild.new Thu Jan  9 15:58:57 2003
***************
*** 18,24 ****
  SLOT="0"
  KEYWORDS="x86 ~ppc ~sparc"
  
! RDEPEND="!<net-mail/evolution-1.2.0
        >=gnome-extra/gal-0.21
        <gnome-base/control-center-1.99.0
        >=gnome-base/libghttp-1.0.9-r1
--- 18,24 ----
  SLOT="0"
  KEYWORDS="x86 ~ppc ~sparc"
  
! RDEPEND=">=net-mail/evolution-1.2.0
        >=gnome-extra/gal-0.21
        <gnome-base/control-center-1.99.0
        >=gnome-base/libghttp-1.0.9-r1
Comment 1 John Enok Vollestad 2003-01-10 04:33:33 UTC
This is the problem mentioned in bug 86.
Comment 2 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2003-01-10 10:21:33 UTC
! means blocker ... 
its used when packages cant coexist together 
 
gnome: i'm leaving this open in case theres anything you wish to do with it ... otherwise feel 
free to close it 
Comment 3 John Enok Vollestad 2003-01-10 16:15:03 UTC
Should not "!<" mean that it can not work with versions less than ..?

I did not have evolution-1.2.0 installed on my system when this error occured so
it seems that id does not work properly.  I had evolution-1.0.8-r2 installed
when i got the error sited above.  This of course is blocking but ordinary
upgrade as I was doing were going to leave the system consistent afterword. 
Previous version was removed.

An upgrade should not be blocked when the blocking would be solved by an
successful upgrade.  However this has nothing to do with the use of the blocking
marker "!" but how this is handled.
Comment 4 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2003-01-10 16:59:16 UTC
*** Bug 13674 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 John Enok Vollestad 2003-01-10 17:25:47 UTC
Reopened until portage is fixed.
Comment 6 John Enok Vollestad 2003-01-10 17:27:53 UTC
The problem with portage is explained in Bug 13674.
Comment 7 foser (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-01-16 10:21:04 UTC
What do you want me to do about it ? Your gtkhtml fix makes ppl who want gtkhtml
install evolution, thats no solution.

I'd say just remove the weird dep and make evolution-1.0.8 block gtkhtml-1.1*
(what already happens), whats your take on this azarah .. it seems a big voodoo
ebuild to me and you're the wicked conjurer.
Comment 8 Martin Schlemmer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-01-17 05:27:26 UTC
> whats your take on this azarah .. it seems a big voodoo
> ebuild to me and you're the wicked conjurer.

O.K.


Sorry if I did what was told to me, but then it turns out that portage
do not handle '!' like it should.  After all, '!<foo-2' should not install
>=foo-2, but just whine if foo-1.* was is installed.

Anyhow, I guess wicked people do not care, right ?


Comment 9 foser (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-01-24 14:35:45 UTC
That would be evil yes, so i guess its ok if i remove the !< dep from
gtkhtml-1.1.7 ? (i'm doing it now).

As far as deps checking goes, portage does a lot of things a bit illogical
because its much easier or not really possible to implement in another way in
the current codebase (last time i looked at the code).