portpeek chokes on atoms of the form “dev-texlive/*”, which it calls invalid. I use such atoms successfully in package.use as, e.g., “dev-texlive/* doc”.
I don't see doc being a valid use flag for dev-texlive/*
(In reply to Mike Pagano from comment #1) > I don't see doc being a valid use flag for dev-texlive/* Do you mean that it is not allowed according to some standard? As far as I understand from the manpage, ‘dev-texlive/*’ is a valid atom. Practically speaking it just works. Luckily so, as it'd be extremely bothersome to add the useflag to all packages individually.
(In reply to Erik Quaeghebeur from comment #2) > (In reply to Mike Pagano from comment #1) > > I don't see doc being a valid use flag for dev-texlive/* > Do you mean that it is not allowed according to some standard? As far as I > understand from the manpage, ‘dev-texlive/*’ is a valid atom. Practically > speaking it just works. Luckily so, as it'd be extremely bothersome to add > the useflag to all packages individually. Not what I mean. I don't see 'doc' as a valid use flag of dev-texlive/* Not sure how to write that any differently.
(In reply to Mike Pagano from comment #3) > I don't see 'doc' as a valid use flag of dev-texlive/* I then assume because in general not all packages in categories will have the same use flag(s) available? (In this particular case there is 1 out of 47 that does not have ‘doc’.) If that is why, then still the *atom* itself is not invalid, but the package.use line is. Perhaps portpeek could report that it doesn't investigate such lines instead of raising an exception? Or is there a valid way to express the same thing without having to list all packages covered by the atom separately? [Strange thing is: I have two installations, both with such a line in package.use; for one I get the exception, for the other portpeek does not complain.]
I'm not convinced yet there is anything wrong yet. Give me the exact output you get and attach both package.use flags. Here's it working: $ cat package.use sys-kernel/* experimental $ portpeek -s package.use: Done Now compare: $ cat package.use sys-kernel/* not_a_useflag_that_is_used_in_any_ebuild_in_sys-kernel_category portpeek -s package.use: use flag: not_a_useflag_that_is_used_in_any_ebuild_in_sys-kernel_category is invalid for : sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-4.14.14 Done
(In reply to Mike Pagano from comment #5) > Give me the exact output you get and attach both package.use flags. I will get back with more info (hopefully) once I get back to the system that gave the error.
Created attachment 519278 [details] console input and output with error
Created attachment 519280 [details] package.use file containing the problematic line
Created attachment 519282 [details] other package.use file present in /etc/portage/package.use
That helps. I'll take a look.
I'm going to release a masked version 2.1.26 soon. Please test and confirm. FYI, in the future, do not modify the STATUS dropdown box. I use it for my workflow and I need to decide if something is confirmed (I looked at it, I ack it, it's in my backlog), vs someone else deciding for me. This may vary with other developers, but I ask that for my bugs.
(In reply to Mike Pagano from comment #11) > I'm going to release a masked version 2.1.26 soon. Please test and confirm. Tested; fixes the issue. I now get "No installed packages found for dev-texlive/*.", which is true. Thanks! > FYI, in the future, do not modify the STATUS dropdown box. Yes, I'll take it as a safe general rule not to mess with those. Sorry for not having thought about that.
(In reply to Erik Quaeghebeur from comment #12) Great. Thanks, appreciate your update and response. Have a good day.
