On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 10:18:05 -0800, Susie wrote:

> > Here is what i did:
> > 
> >     # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 emerge openbox
> > 
> > which installed 2.3.0
> 
> I didn't try it that way.  Does that simply turn it on for that one
> instance?

Yes, just like Brett said.

>           I know there is some place to change it to allow all ~86
> and I don't want to do that.  I just want a few packages that are
> masked.

That place would be /etc/make.conf. But like you I only use a few of
these via the ~arch functionality unstable marked ebuilds and therefor
use the above mentioned way of emerging unstable marked ebuilds.

> > Maybe the trouble here comes from --deep? Because 'emerge -pU world'
> > doesn't say anything about openbox, given you pinned the version to
> > 2.3.0 in the world file.
> 
> No I don't think so as I have several other files anchored in world
> and it seems to leave some of those alone.  Tho granted in hind site
> some of those probably don't have a current stable version and are
> just new ebuilds that are masked.

Well I tested it and after pinning openbox to 2.3.0 in world and using
'emerge -pU world' portage didn't want to install another openbox. 
 
> > That's a bug in the ebuild. Since 2.1.3-r4 and 2.3.0 uses different
> > slots they shouldn't overwrite each other. You could file it on
> > Bugzilla.
> > Also: What Daniel suggested (-U) doesn't work because of the
> > different slots as well.
> 
> Well I checked and the only seperate files is their doccuments.  I've
> tried rsyncing then unmasking the ebuild several times and always same
> result.

Then please file a bug.

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Reply via email to