On Thursday 04 Apr 2013 14:57:38 João Matos wrote:
Everything is working ok now. :)
Next time I'll keep in mind looking at eselect new.
Best you try:
eselect news read new
or
eselect news list
if you want to list them all.
--
Regards,
Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a
On 2013-04-03 6:28 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 03 Apr 2013 20:46:37 Bruce Hill wrote:
Therefore, all's well that's still working! And AFAIR, on at least 2 of
those machines, the 70-persistent-net.rules was never something I did
manually.
Right, it used to be
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 09:07:00AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
On 2013-04-04 5:13 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
I gets so bad that people are starting to make shit up to be worried
about, instead of just reading the simple document that is right in
front of their eyes that
But what confuses me about that linked page is that from what I've heard
from others here, option 1 - which is the option I think I'd prefer -
requires more than just symlinking 80-net-name-slot.rules to
/dev/null...? Apparently you should also create your own
70-my-net-names.rules - but I've
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:32:23PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
But what confuses me about that linked page is that from what I've heard
from others here, option 1 - which is the option I think I'd prefer -
requires more than just symlinking 80-net-name-slot.rules to
/dev/null...? Apparently you
On 2013-04-05 2:41 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:32:23PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
But what confuses me about that linked page is that from what I've heard
from others here, option 1 - which is the option I think I'd prefer -
requires more than just
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:41:28PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:32:23PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
But what confuses me about that linked page is that from what I've heard
from others here, option 1 - which is the option I think I'd prefer -
requires more than just
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:41:28PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
Neither of these is needed if you want to have your own names,
because naming the interfaces yourself in /etc/uev/70-net-names.rules or
whatever you call the file overrides udev's predictable names.
If people are using ethx
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 02:38:21PM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote:
Just dealing with one server and my Linux router, they've been updated to
sys-fs/udev-200 and are both still using the same
/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules file they've had for over a year,
which was working with udev-171.
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 02:58:02PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
I'd still like to know why the contents of my current rules file differs
so much from the examples I've seen... ie, the two extra items that are
in mine ('DRIVERS==' and 'KERNEL=='), and the missing one
('ACTION==')... and whether
-3.16.14.9-r1'`.
* The complete build log is located at '/var/log/portage/dev-
lang:v8-3.16.14.9-r1:20130405-202806.log'.
* For convenience, a symlink to the build log is located at
'/tmp/portage/dev-lang/v8-3.16.14.9-r1/temp/build.log'.
* The ebuild environment file is located at '/tmp/portage/dev
is located at
'/var/log/portage/dev-lang:v8-3.16.14.9-r1:20130405-202806.log'.
* For convenience, a symlink to the build log is located at
'/tmp/portage/dev-lang/v8-3.16.14.9-r1/temp/build.log'.
* The ebuild environment file is located at
'/tmp/portage/dev-lang/v8-3.16.14.9-r1/temp
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 03:11:39PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 02:38:21PM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote:
Just dealing with one server and my Linux router, they've been updated to
sys-fs/udev-200 and are both still using the same
/etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Peter Humphrey pe...@humphrey.ukfsn.org wrote:
Hello list,
Today's update wanted to move v8 up from 3.15.11.15 to 3.16.14.9-r1 but the
emerge failed. Here are the last few lines of console output (well, the
first of these is very long - sorry; it ends with
On Friday 05 April 2013 22:52:57 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
But why are you even updating a dependency? Makes no sense at all. Or do
you just love randomly breaking stuff?
As if I would. I synced and updated world but v8 failed. I showed you what
happened to further attempts to get it
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 01:41:28PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote
If people are using ethx names and getting away with it it is probably
because they are loading the drivers as modules, or by chance the kernel
is initializing the cards in the order they expect. There is no
guarantee that will
What user interface exist for gnupg for XFCE4 ?
--
Joseph
17 matches
Mail list logo
