Re: [gentoo-user] USB crucial file recovery

On Monday 29 Aug 2016 17:51:19 Grant wrote: > > I have a USB stick with a crucial file on it (and only an old backup > > elsewhere). It's formatted NTFS because I wanted to be able to open > > the file on various Gentoo systems and my research indicated that > >>> > >>>NTFS > >>> >

Re: [gentoo-user] Shutter alternatives

meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote: > Jean-Christophe Bach [16-08-27 12:00]: >> Hello, >> >>> I am looking for an alternative for shutter, which has been >>> removed from portage which is not shutterbug (see me initial posting). >>> >>> So neither shutter nor shutterbug is an

Re: [gentoo-user] USB crucial file recovery

2016-08-30 5:51 GMT+05:00 Grant : > Ah, I got it, I just needed to specify the offset when mounting. > Thank you so much everyone. Many hours of work went into the file I > just recovered. > > So I'm done with NTFS forever. Will ext2 somehow allow me to use the > USB stick

Re: [gentoo-user] guvcview update produces an executable with missing lib...

Daniel Frey [16-08-30 03:48]: > On 08/29/2016 11:11 AM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 06:29:50PM +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote > >> Hi, > >> > >> after updateing my system, beside others guvcview was updated: > >> > >> from qlop > >> Mon Aug 29

Re: [gentoo-user] USB crucial file recovery

> I have a USB stick with a crucial file on it (and only an old backup > elsewhere). It's formatted NTFS because I wanted to be able to open > the file on various Gentoo systems and my research indicated that >>>NTFS > was the best solution. > > I decided to copy a 10GB

Re: [gentoo-user] USB crucial file recovery

I have a USB stick with a crucial file on it (and only an old backup elsewhere). It's formatted NTFS because I wanted to be able to open the file on various Gentoo systems and my research indicated that >>NTFS was the best solution. I decided to copy a 10GB file from

Re: [gentoo-user] python-updater: depclean removes it?

On 08/29/2016 03:39 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/29/2016 06:10 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> >> What replaces it's functionality, or what is now in the codebase that >> guarantees the problems python-updater fixed can't happen anymore? >> > > *shrug* > > mgorny says: > > It's obsolete

Re: [gentoo-user] python-updater: depclean removes it?

On 08/29/2016 06:10 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > What replaces it's functionality, or what is now in the codebase that > guarantees the problems python-updater fixed can't happen anymore? > *shrug* mgorny says: It's obsolete for a long time (pretty much since PYTHON_TARGETS become

Re: [gentoo-user] python-updater: depclean removes it?

On 29/08/2016 21:29, Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 08/29/2016 03:08 PM, Daniel Frey wrote: Did something change recently? I was doing some updates and noticed app-admin/python-updater was removed. It's still in the tree but the system decided it was no longer needed - was it removed from @system?

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge @system

On 29/08/2016 21:08, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 17:04:08 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote: I remember someone (Dale?) some time ago being dismayed at the large number of packages that would be installed by emerge @system. Now I see what he meant: on this box 401 of the 1103 installed

Re: [gentoo-user] python-updater: depclean removes it?

On 08/29/2016 03:08 PM, Daniel Frey wrote: > Did something change recently? > > I was doing some updates and noticed app-admin/python-updater was > removed. It's still in the tree but the system decided it was no longer > needed - was it removed from @system? > It's no longer needed, its

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge @system

On Mon, 29 Aug 2016 17:04:08 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote: > I remember someone (Dale?) some time ago being dismayed at the large > number of packages that would be installed by emerge @system. > > Now I see what he meant: on this box 401 of the 1103 installed > packages. I'd like to construct a

[gentoo-user] python-updater: depclean removes it?

Did something change recently? I was doing some updates and noticed app-admin/python-updater was removed. It's still in the tree but the system decided it was no longer needed - was it removed from @system? After an update I typically run perl-cleaner, python-updater, and revdep-rebuild to catch

Re: [gentoo-user] guvcview update produces an executable with missing lib...

On 08/29/2016 11:11 AM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 06:29:50PM +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote >> Hi, >> >> after updateing my system, beside others guvcview was updated: >> >> from qlop >> Mon Aug 29 17:44:08 2016 >>> media-video/guvcview-2.0.4 >> >> After ldconfig as

Re: [gentoo-user] guvcview update produces an executable with missing lib...

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 06:29:50PM +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote > Hi, > > after updateing my system, beside others guvcview was updated: > > from qlop > Mon Aug 29 17:44:08 2016 >>> media-video/guvcview-2.0.4 > > After ldconfig as root and rehash (zsh) as user I got: > >

[gentoo-user] guvcview update produces an executable with missing lib...

Hi, after updateing my system, beside others guvcview was updated: from qlop Mon Aug 29 17:44:08 2016 >>> media-video/guvcview-2.0.4 After ldconfig as root and rehash (zsh) as user I got: /home/user>guvcview guvcview: error while loading shared libraries: libgviewv4l2core-1.0.so.1: cannot

[gentoo-user] emerge @system

Hello list, I remember someone (Dale?) some time ago being dismayed at the large number of packages that would be installed by emerge @system. Now I see what he meant: on this box 401 of the 1103 installed packages. I'd like to construct a set that would create a reliable basis for building

Re: [gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

On Thursday, August 25, 2016 07:29:35 PM Raymond Jennings wrote: > I still use bopm, and it built fine last time I emerged it. > > If hopm isn't in the tree yet, why was bopm still pmasked for removal? > > Reason for asking is I'm curious about removal procedures. I was under the > impression

Re: [gentoo-user] Is there a reason why LLVM/Clang ebuilds don't support "mutislot"?

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:58:03PM -0400, P Levine wrote: > Other distros like Ubuntu support the installation of multiple versions of > LLVM/Clang side by side. One of the things Clang is really good at is > support for the most recently approved upcoming features of the C++17 > standard. The