You are not logged in.
Hi folks,
after recent upgrade of yaourt (to version 0.9.4-2) its behavior has changed. Previously, when there were a dependency conflict, it printed the reason. But now, there's only generic message. In yaourt and yaourtrc manuals isn't said anything about this feature. Besides, pacman still shows required info.
Compare pacman output:
$ sudo pacman -Su
:: Starting full system upgrade...
warning: e-modules-extra-svn: local (48190-1) is newer than community (47744-1)
warning: e_dbus-svn: local (48091-1) is newer than community (47398-1)
warning: ecore-svn: local (48064-1) is newer than community (47760-2)
warning: eet-svn: local (48204-1) is newer than community (47721-1)
warning: efreet-svn: local (48110-1) is newer than community (47737-1)
warning: eina-svn: local (48099-1) is newer than community (47741-1)
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: lib32-glibc-devel: requires lib32-glibc=2.11.1and yaourt one (surely less logical):
$ yaourt -Su
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)Is it a bug or a hidden feature? If it's a feature, how it can be reversed to normal output?
P.S. The reason of conflict is quite clear (new AUR packages), but only with pacman help (
Last edited by Kosmonavt (2010-06-09 10:04:26)
Offline
Solved in at least 0.9.4.2-1.
Offline
How is that dependency problem solved by the way? thanks! :]
Offline
How is that dependency problem solved by the way? thanks! :]
usually by updating lib32-glibc-devel first ![]()
Give what you have. To someone, it may be better than you dare to think.
Offline
Sorry, forgot to mark the topic as solved ) This way didn't help. I needed to remove lib32-glibc with -Rd, and then build lib32-glibc-devel again. Then it grabbed dependencies in a right way. Otherwise there was a circle - lib32-glibc couldn't be upgraded because dependency problem blocked upgrading, but lib32-glibc-devel wouldn't compile because of old lib32-glibc .
Offline
thank you both!
Kosmonavt's suggestion solved the problematic circle indeed :]
Last edited by 00l0 (2010-06-09 13:07:11)
Offline