Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 62892

Summary: revdep-rebuild attitude about package sorting
Product: Portage Development Reporter: crusaderky
Component: Enhancement/Feature RequestsAssignee: Portage Tools Team <tools-portage>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE    
Severity: normal CC: fuzzyray
Priority: High    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---
Bug Depends on: 62644    
Bug Blocks:    

Description crusaderky 2004-09-05 02:14:22 UTC
Sometimes (actually, several times) revdep-rebuild will fail to sort the packages building order and will simply say "sorting failed; emerging in random order".

This can prove catastrophical, since if package B depends on A and A is broken, if B is recompiled before A the compilation will fail.

Suggested attitude:
a)propose a list of packages that caused the "sorting failed" error. Currently, in most cases the user can only guess what happened.
b)place such packages at the end of the build list and correctly sort the other packages. This will minimize errors.
Comment 1 Paul Varner (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-09-29 19:03:11 UTC
If you can give me some real world examples, I can try to duplicate and see what is causing the issue.  Without being able to see the problem occur, I'm not sure that I can do anything to make revdep-rebuild smarter.
Comment 2 crusaderky 2004-09-30 02:23:23 UTC
it happens whenever the user must rebuild a package whose exact version is no longer in portage. Needless to say, this is quite normal.
Comment 3 Paul Varner (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2004-09-30 12:11:52 UTC
Using the --package-names option should be able to handle this situation.  The exception will be when a package has been completely removed from the tree.
Comment 4 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2005-12-03 08:15:07 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> it happens whenever the user must rebuild a package whose exact version is no
longer in portage. Needless to say, this is quite normal.

Dupe.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 22161 ***