Apparently, though unproven, at 02:26 on Monday 25 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you :-)
Or in this case, it doesn't mean it's not justified. I now have
Apparently, though unproven, at 04:36 on Monday 25 October 2010, Dale did
opine thusly:
Then again, Alan knows
Gentoo pretty well and may know that he doesn't need sandbox.
Once for fun I build a gentoo system in VirtualBox and left sandbox out by
accident.
The results were ... awful. Bad
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
FEATURES= buildpkg sandbox fixpackages parallel-fetch --keep-going
I thought --keep-going goes into EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS, no?
--
Fatih
Am 25.10.2010 04:36, schrieb Dale:
FEATURES= buildpkg sandbox fixpackages parallel-fetch --keep-going
Hi,
parallel-fetch is default and no need to list it in make.conf any more.
I notices when I had to add -parallel-fetch to one of my boxes.
kh
On 10/25/2010 01:24 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 04:36 on Monday 25 October 2010, Dale did
opine thusly:
Then again, Alan knows
Gentoo pretty well and may know that he doesn't need sandbox.
Once for fun I build a gentoo system in VirtualBox and left sandbox
Apparently, though unproven, at 15:09 on Monday 25 October 2010, Bill Longman
did opine thusly:
On 10/25/2010 01:24 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 04:36 on Monday 25 October 2010, Dale did
opine thusly:
Then again, Alan knows
Gentoo pretty well and may know
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Apparently, though unproven, at 02:26 on Monday 25 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you :-)
Or in this case, it
On Monday 25 October 2010 9:50:30 pm Allan Gottlieb wrote:
Yes?
yes
--
- Yohan Pereira.
Apparently, though unproven, at 13:50 on Saturday 23 October 2010, daid kahl
did opine thusly:
Don't worry about it. I'm not sure if portage-2.1.9.20 will deal with
this automagically (I *think* it does these days and 2.2 definitely
does) but if not just
emerge -C shadow ; emerge -1
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you :-)
Or in this case, it doesn't mean it's not justified. I now have buildpkg
enabled for @system - everything else I can re-run emerge to fix.
Does this mean for portage
Allan Gottlieb wrote:
Alan McKinnonalan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you :-)
Or in this case, it doesn't mean it's not justified. I now have buildpkg
enabled for @system - everything else I can re-run emerge to fix.
Apparently, though unproven, at 05:13 on Saturday 23 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
Now I have masked mesa-7.8.2 downgrading to 7.7.1, which necessitated a
downgrade of xorg-server to 1.7.7-r1 (latest stable), which necessitated
a downgrade of xinit to 1.2.1.
Thus my
Don't worry about it. I'm not sure if portage-2.1.9.20 will deal with this
automagically (I *think* it does these days and 2.2 definitely does) but if
not just
emerge -C shadow ; emerge -1 shadow
then emerge -avuND world.
No good technical reason for doing shadow first apart from getting
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Apparently, though unproven, at 05:13 on Saturday 23 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
Now I have masked mesa-7.8.2 downgrading to 7.7.1, which necessitated a
downgrade of xorg-server to 1.7.7-r1 (latest stable), which necessitated
daid kahl daid...@gmail.com writes:
Don't worry about it. I'm not sure if portage-2.1.9.20 will deal with this
automagically (I *think* it does these days and 2.2 definitely does) but if
not just
emerge -C shadow ; emerge -1 shadow
then emerge -avuND world.
No good technical reason for
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk writes:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:06:25 +0300, Timur Aydin wrote:
I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:11 on Friday 22 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
[snip]
package.mask is the right place, but you should add the specific version.
Then the system will only upgrade when a newer (hopefully fixed) version
arrives.
=media-libs/mesa-7.8.2
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:11 on Friday 22 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
[snip]
Perhaps I should be downgrading xorg-server as well.
Masking mesa-7.8.2 means (per the ebuilds) you will have to drop back to
Hi,
I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
downgraded to version 7.7.1 and my desktop works great again.
Now I want to
Am 18.10.2010 12:06, schrieb Timur Aydin:
Hi,
I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
downgraded to version 7.7.1 and
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:06:25 +0300, Timur Aydin wrote:
I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
downgraded to version
21 matches
Mail list logo
