.... [ebuild U ] dev-libs/nss-3.15.4 [3.15.3] USE="utils" 6,245 kB [ebuild U ] sys-process/procps-3.3.8-r2 [3.3.8-r1] USE="ncurses nls unicode -static-libs" 3 kB [blocks B ] <x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 ("<x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20" is blocking www-client/chromium-32.0.1700.77) * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be * installed at the same time on the same system. (x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-304.117::gentoo, installed) pulled in by x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers required by (x11-base/xorg-drivers-1.14::gentoo, installed) x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers required by @selected (www-client/chromium-32.0.1700.77::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by www-client/chromium required by @selected For more information about Blocked Packages, please refer to the following section of the Gentoo Linux x86 Handbook (architecture is irrelevant): http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?full=1#blocked My hardware is supported until x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-304.117 and not beyond that version of the driver. so this requirement in www-client/chromium-32.0.1700.77 is not very useful. Is there a specific reason for this requirement or is an older version just not tested. Reproducible: Always Expected Results: not this blocker between seemingly unrelated items. install???
# For nvidia-drivers blocker, see bug #413637 . RDEPEND+=" !=www-client/chromium-9999 x11-misc/xdg-utils virtual/ttf-fonts tcmalloc? ( !<x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 )" *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 413637 ***
This IS NOT a duplicate. I have NO problems with the current chromium-31.0.1650.63 With nvidia-drivers-304.117 No hanging process, pro problems afaict. This is a dependency problem not a chromium problem as such. The 304.117 driver doesn't have the problems that appearantly later drivers have. The opensource NV driver & later nvidia drivers have a very poor performance, as the accelerator appearantly isn't use in those.
Personally, I would just drop the blocker. The alternative is to maintain some kind of blacklist of known broken versions of nvidia-drivers, and that just seems like a lot of work for little benefit.
What would be wrong with masking the known bad versions of drivers, then people who still want them can unmask them. That would make probably everybody happy.
(In reply to Nico Baggus from comment #4) > What would be wrong with masking the known bad versions of drivers, then > people who still want them can unmask them. > That would make probably everybody happy. Because not everybody uses chromium.
I assume that known bad versions are not 'bad' only on +tcmalloc in chromium? there have been word wars here in b.g.o in nvidia in the past just about the coding itself. i'll leave it at this, it looks like there is a workaround on the -tcmalloc front so it now "works for me".
(In reply to Nico Baggus from comment #4) > What would be wrong with masking the known bad versions of drivers, then > people who still want them can unmask them. Masking a list of them in the chromium ebuilds is cumbersome and hard to maintain (since you need different hardware to test the different versions of nvidia-drivers properly. Masking several branches of nvidia-drivers ebuilds is plain silly, since versions that cause the bug should simply be replaced by versions that do not. > That would make probably everybody happy. Probably not. If your workaround works for you, then it comes down to being a duplicate of the original bug report which caused someone to set a bad dependency, and which is now again under review. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 413637 ***
That's fun. This bug was marked as a duplicate of #413637 bug. Then #413637 bug was closed. I propose to reopen this bug. x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers has several pools of versions for different products. For example, I have nVidia GeForce 7600 GS 512 MB. Also I have >=x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-305.0.0 in /etc/portage/package.mask. The latest version I have installed is x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-304.125 which updates periodically to some 304.XXX version. Somebody wrote tcmalloc? ( !<x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 ) in chromium ebuild. That means that all legacy nVidia cards were banned to use tcmalloc. Is there any real reason for such ban? Please, reopen this bug, because this is not a duplicate of #413637.
I also have older nVidia card which can't use newer drivers. Also, did anyone test that issue persist with chromium newer than 2012?
