El lun, 04-11-2013 a las 10:01 -0500, Ian Stakenvicius escribió: > On 03/11/13 07:10 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > > On Sun, 03 Nov 2013 10:53:13 +0200 Alan McKinnon > > <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 02/11/2013 17:03, Michał Górny wrote: Sadly, it's somewhat > >> common for (newish) users to not know what to do with that. > >> Blocker output can be quite daunting in the beginning, especially > >> if it's in the middle of 20 other things portage is also > >> updating. > > > > +1 I agree, we should look into having errors not only tell what > > we should not do, but also tell what we could do; every time I see > > a blocker it is annoying that I have to go manually search the > > solution. > > > > This sounds like a great idea. > > However, let's first get Portage to stop dumping out massive amounts > of useless and/or meaningless slot collision messages first, seemingly > *whenever* there is some other random and unrelated blockage > triggered. Dropping the extra noise will help a lot I think to make > things more clear. >
I agree, but I think a bug was already opened due that and wasn't so easy to solve :( (not sure if Zac will read this to clarify). I think it was a problem due backtracking code
