Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 46455 - please let portage implicit mask ebuilds, which depend on masked ebuilds
Summary: please let portage implicit mask ebuilds, which depend on masked ebuilds
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Portage Development
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-04-01 01:26 UTC by Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED)
Modified: 2005-02-28 00:27 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 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-04-01 01:26:16 UTC
Why? Today dev-python/mod_python-3.0.4-r2, which depends on Apache 2, was declared stable on ~x86. Having "=net-www/apache-2*" in /etc/portage/package.mask and mod_python-2.7.10 (for Apache 1) installed, caused the following error:

Calculating world dependencies /
!!! all ebuilds that could satisfy ">=net-www/apache-2.0" have been masked.
!!! possible candidates are:
- net-www/apache-2.0.48 (masked by: package.mask)
- net-www/apache-2.0.48-r2 (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
- net-www/apache-2.0.48-r4 (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
- net-www/apache-2.0.47 (masked by: package.mask)
- net-www/apache-2.0.48-r1 (masked by: package.mask)
- net-www/apache-2.0.49 (masked by: package.mask)
- net-www/apache-2.0.48-r3 (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
- net-www/apache-2.0.47-r1 (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
- net-www/apache-2.0.46 (masked by: package.mask)
!!!    (dependency required by "dev-python/mod_python-3.0.4-r2" [ebuild])

!!! Problem with ebuild dev-python/mod_python-3.0.4-r2
!!! Possibly a DEPEND/*DEPEND problem.

!!! Depgraph creation failed.

Now I have to put "=dev-python/mod_python-3*" in package.mask, too. Not a big problem, but which ebuild will be the next? Having lots of ebuilds in package.* files will most likely cause more problems, while this "mask dependency" could be easily and more elegant solved by portage.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
Comment 1 Alec Warner (RETIRED) archtester gentoo-dev Security 2005-01-17 20:53:27 UTC
The problem then becomes how to make it clear that what portage is about to install is p.masked.  We tend to not automate things like that because then people unmask things willy nilly, and especially p.masked packages, they are masked for a reason.  The real question is how to make it so that people who want a better tool to do the unmasking ( which I would agree with, it does get annoying especiall with mono ;) ) without giving people who don't know what they are doing a tool to hang themselves with.
Comment 2 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-01-18 09:23:38 UTC
Alec, please don't muddle that. I want to mask implicitly, which would be a nice feature to deal with slotted packages and their dependecies, when you don't want to have the stable slot X+1 package installed. I don't want to unmask implitly - or "willy nilly" as you say.
Comment 3 Brian Harring (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-02-28 00:27:25 UTC
This... likely ain't going to happen.
If someone horks the tree by masking a required dependency, we slap them.  Detecting, backtracking, and lieing to the user that a package isn't available cause one of it's deps is masked doesn't seem right...
Re-open if you disagree/have an approach to this that can be sanely implemented :)