On Sonntag 09 Mai 2010, Rudmer van Dijk wrote: > On Sunday 09 May 2010, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > On Sonntag 09 Mai 2010, Rudmer van Dijk wrote: > > > On Sunday 09 May 2010, walt wrote: > > > > This looks to me like a major portage screwup. I see that on my > > > > ~amd64 machine I have both versions of libpng, but the 1.2.43-r1 > > > > doesn't install a pkg-config file because 1.4.2 installs one with > > > > the same name, and just as bad, version 1.2.43-r1 removed the > > > > libpng12 header files. > > > > > > > > For now, I'd suggest just going back to to 1.2.43 if you can -- maybe > > > > mask > > > > > > > > >1.2.43 in package.mask? > > > > > > > > Meanwhile I'm trying to fix firefox so I can read the bug report > > > > mentioned by Andras. > > > > > > well I'm getting into a .la hell... > > > you need to rebuild packages which are themselves not invalid and > > > therefore can't be found by revdep-rebuild... > > > > > > searching with "grep png12 `find /usr/lib64/ -name '*.la'`" lists all > > > .la files with a bad png version, rebuilding those will fix the > > > system. after that all packages found by revdep-rebuild can be > > > emerged. > > > > > > Rudmer > > > > run la fixer > > ah, yes I knew there was something easier 8-) > well running `lafilefixer --justfixit` did not find anything so I got them > all > > thanks! > > Rudmer
sadly, it does not get them all. The only save way: grep -R for png12 and remerge all packages whose files pop up. For example revdep-rebuilt failed to rebuild pygtk - because of glade. But it never tried to rebuild glade...
