Davyd McColl wrote:
>
>
> On January 3, 2019 8:59:09 AM Dale wrote:
>
>> Davyd McColl wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale wrote:
>>>
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>> I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one thing that would
On January 3, 2019 8:59:09 AM Dale wrote:
Davyd McColl wrote:
On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale wrote:
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one thing that would make
Firefox different from say the average user who
Davyd McColl wrote:
>
>
> On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale wrote:
>
>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one thing that would make
Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
from
On 01/03 08:15, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 03/01/2019 07:37, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > after updateing I have run (beside others) this command:
> >
> > eclean-dist -C -d -v
> >
> > and got:
> >
> > The following unavailable installed packages were found
> >
On 03/01/2019 07:37, tu...@posteo.de wrote:
Hi,
after updateing I have run (beside others) this command:
eclean-dist -C -d -v
and got:
The following unavailable installed packages were found
sys-devel/autoconf-2.13
Running
eix sys-devel/autoconf
and got
[U]
On January 3, 2019 12:29:34 AM Dale wrote:
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one thing that would make
Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
from the website.
Is there a reason you don't
Hi,
after updateing I have run (beside others) this command:
eclean-dist -C -d -v
and got:
The following unavailable installed packages were found
sys-devel/autoconf-2.13
Running
eix sys-devel/autoconf
and got
[U] sys-devel/autoconf
Available versions:
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
>> I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one thing that would make
>> Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
>> from the website.
> Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
>
On 02/01/2019 16:28, Peter Humphrey wrote:
That's the end of that idea then. I wanted to see if my problem with loop-
mounting an iso was something introduced with a recent gcc, but now I may
never know.
It seems that if GCC 7 doesn't emerge with the latest glibc, then that's
a bug you should
On 02/01/2019 22:45, Dale wrote:
I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one thing that would make
Firefox different from say the average user who just downloads Firefox
from the website.
Is there a reason you don't want to try the firefox-bin package I
meantion in my previous post?
Davyd McColl wrote:
> And fwiw, I haven't had this problem with building from source either.
> And just recently switched to clang too, though Firefox was plenty
> speedy before so I'm not really noticing the gains that were advertised.
>
> -d
>
>
I changed some USE flags. I figure that is one
On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 08:48:19 GMT Dan Johansson wrote:
> > Hmm ... I've mounted it, modified it and eventually tried to run the bash
> > script to copy it over to a USB stick. It wasn't happy to run this time,
> > following my modifications:
> >
> > # bash ./usb_inst.sh
> > Device
On Wednesday, 2 January 2019 10:47:50 GMT Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 02/01/2019 12:27, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > I'm trying to compile gcc-7.3.0-r3 to test a hypothesis, but I get this
> > failure:
> >
> > /var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-7.3.0-r3/work/gcc-7.3.0/libsanitizer/saniti
> >
It seems it's a recent removal then. It's not there on my system
(glibc-2.28-r4.)
On 02/01/2019 12:58, Franz Fellner wrote:
❯ qfile /usr/include/sys/ustat.h
sys-libs/glibc (/usr/include/sys/ustat.h)
~ 36s
❯ eix -e glibc
[I] sys-libs/glibc
Available versions: (2.2) [M]**2.19-r2^s
❯ qfile /usr/include/sys/ustat.h
sys-libs/glibc (/usr/include/sys/ustat.h)
~ 36s
❯ eix -e glibc
[I] sys-libs/glibc
Available versions: (2.2) [M]**2.19-r2^s [M]2.21-r2^s [M]2.22-r4^s
[M]2.23-r4^s [M]~2.24-r4^s [M]2.25-r11^s [M]2.26-r7^s 2.27-r6^s ~2.28-r4^s
**^s
{audit caps cet
On 02/01/2019 12:27, Peter Humphrey wrote:
I'm trying to compile gcc-7.3.0-r3 to test a hypothesis, but I get this
failure:
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-7.3.0-r3/work/gcc-7.3.0/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:157:10:
fatal error: sys/ustat.h: No such file or
I'm trying to compile gcc-7.3.0-r3 to test a hypothesis, but I get this
failure:
/var/tmp/portage/sys-devel/gcc-7.3.0-r3/work/gcc-7.3.0/libsanitizer/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_platform_limits_posix.cc:157:10:
fatal error: sys/ustat.h: No such file or directory
#include
I thought it might be
Hmm ... I've mounted it, modified it and eventually tried to run the bash
script to copy it over to a USB stick. It wasn't happy to run this time,
following my modifications:
# bash ./usb_inst.sh
Device [/dev/sdb] detected as [ USB DISK Pro] is removable and
size=954MB
* Device
18 matches
Mail list logo
