On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 20:45:10 +0200, lee wrote: > >> Go ahead and show me where I have demanded something. > > Your insistence that it should be changed amounts to a demand. Your > assertion that it can be done easily only demeans the efforts of the > devs, implying that the fix is simple but they cannot be bothered.
Guys, please take a break. We're up to over 50 messages in this thread, most of which are basically a back and forth on this. Nobody likes the output of portage here, we get it... The next council meeting will include proposals to stop relying on dynamic deps, which should cut down on some of these issues. There are always ideas floating around for substantially changing how dependencies are handled in portage, and those might help. Short-term if somebody wants to write up a wiki page full of common confusing portage error messages and improved versions of the same, and instructions on how to handle each situation, that would both help users today, and give the portage devs something to contemplate in their enhancements. There is no reason portage couldn't even figure out which case an error falls into and either output the text on the page or give the user a link to go look up instructions on how to resolve. I find more tends to happen when you direct your energy at creating something. Clearly you are both interested in Gentoo and going back and forth isn't helping anybody. -- Rich
