Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 602690 - Circular dependency between sys-libs/gpm and sys-libs/ncurses
Summary: Circular dependency between sys-libs/gpm and sys-libs/ncurses
Status: RESOLVED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 616824 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2016-12-14 20:09 UTC by deference
Modified: 2018-09-08 21:39 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

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


Attachments
emerge log (cir04.txt,92.18 KB, text/plain)
2016-12-14 20:09 UTC, deference
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description deference 2016-12-14 20:09:45 UTC
Created attachment 456230 [details]
emerge log

Recently I had to rebuild my system (RAM failure) and I noticed and captured all the circular dependency problems.
(sys-libs/gpm-1.20.7-r2:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) depends on
 (sys-libs/ncurses-5.9-r5:0/5::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) (buildtime_slot_op)
  (sys-libs/gpm-1.20.7-r2:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) (buildtime)

It might be possible to break this cycle
by applying the following change:
- sys-libs/ncurses-5.9-r5 (Change USE: -gpm)
Comment 1 Brian Evans (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2016-12-14 20:17:39 UTC
This is a configuration issue. Portage guides you with what to do temporarily after which you can reset the USE flags.
Comment 2 Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2017-04-28 10:35:36 UTC
*** Bug 616824 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 anonymous 2017-04-30 22:30:10 UTC
I thought about this issue for a while.
This issue is not invalid.
Marking it as an invalid gives an impression that it is not an issue.

This issue leads to more micro-management and confuses users.

It is desirable to solve this if possible.

After thinking for a while, I concluded that this issue should be solved in upstream packages.

Thus, I think it's more correct to mark it as CANTFIX.
Comment 4 Rafael Kitover 2018-09-08 21:39:01 UTC
I agree that this is a ridiculous situation, if a package needs to be built twice to handle a circular dependency, then portage should have mechanisms to do this.