I don't use net-mail/uw-mailutils but I use pine. To update the uw-imap I need umerge the pine and if I tray emerge pine the system say "The above package list contains packages which cannot be installed!!! on the same system." Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. emerge net-mail/uw-imap 2. 3. Actual Results: pine is blocking net-mail/uw-mailutils Expected Results: emerge pine. I need the pine client to read my mail...
> I don't use net-mail/uw-mailutils but I use pine. Henrique: You use uw-imap, which depends on uw-mailutils. Due to this _intentional_ blocker you can either use pine or uw-imap, but not both. Andrej: When you add a blocker it has always to be mutual.
(In reply to comment #1) > > I don't use net-mail/uw-mailutils but I use pine. > Henrique: You use uw-imap, which depends on uw-mailutils. Due to this > _intentional_ blocker you can either use pine or uw-imap, but not both. > > Andrej: When you add a blocker it has always to be mutual. I unmerge the "net-mail/uw-mailutils" but now the system try install the package again... Calculating world dependencies ...done! [blocks B ] <mail-client/pine-4.64-r1 (is blocking net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g) [ebuild N ] net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g !!! Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be installed !!! on the same system.
(In reply to comment #2) > I unmerge the "net-mail/uw-mailutils" but now the system try install the > package again... Sure, because uw-imap needs it. Either unmerge that or pine.
Perhaps, but I do not have pine installed and I'm trying to upgrade uw-imap and portage says that uw-imap < 2005g blocks uw-mailutils! Duh? gw ~ # emerge uw-imap -p These are the packages that I would merge, in order: Calculating dependencies ...done! [blocks B ] <net-mail/uw-imap-2004g-r1 (is blocking net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g) [ebuild N ] net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g [ebuild U ] net-mail/uw-imap-2004g-r1 [2004c-r3] If this is a different bug, please let me know...
Looking at it Pine *requires* both uw-mailutils and uw-imap, so we are having the same problem with the uw-imap / mailutils ebuilds. I have a workaround, but it's something that should be (have been) fixed with the ebuild.
Actually, situation is like this: both uw-imap and pine need uw-mailutils, because it provides files which were provided by both of these packages, thus causing a file collision with FEATURES="collision-protect" (bug #105313). The problem is that due to security bug #108206, both uw-imap and uw-mailutils went almost directly into stable, leaving pine-4.64-r1 - the first pine ebuild aware of uw-mailutils in unstable, thus causing error message in comment #2. Incidentally, I was mostly offline for the weekend (family issues), so I didn't get to my bugmail - and to this report - soon enough. When I realized it, I moved 4.64-r1 to stable on x86 and asked amd64 team to do the same. Right now, the problem should be gone on x86 arch - I'm not sure about amd64, but I will see to it ASAP. Please accept my apology for any inconveniences coming from this, it was all done in bit of a hurry, because of the security hole in uw-imap.
Created attachment 70249 [details] Output from 'emerge info' and 'emerge pine'
I tried to get the new pine to install by first unmerging the old one. Unfortunately the new pine wants to emerge net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g which doesn't build on my machine. My amateur analysis is that it tries to use headers from pam which I do not have (I use USE=-pam) Just FYI. Should I create a separate bug-entry for net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g about this? Attached is output from my 'emerge info' and 'emerge pine'
Can you please tell me what happens if you change line 39 in the ebuild to: yes | make slx EXTRACFLAGS="${CFLAGS}" SSLTYPE=none || die You will need to recreate the ebuild digest by running $ ebuild uw-mailutils-2004g.ebuild digest after you modify it.
Yes that did it. Total success. Both net-mail/uw-mailutils-2004g and mail-client/pine-4.64-r1 emerged cleanly.
*** Bug 108659 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The change has been committed to CVS. Are there any more issues?
(In reply to comment #12) > The change has been committed to CVS. > > Are there any more issues? Now everything looks great. Thanks for your help.
