-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 de Almeida, Valmor F. wrote: > !!! A file listed in the Manifest could not be found: > /usr/portage/net-fs/nfs-utils/files/nfs.confd.old
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172231 > Now on my other boxes I proceeded with an emerge --sync to sync the > portage tree with the local rsync server. A new portage version was > available, then I issued an emerge portage. At the end of the emerge, > the cache was updated on its own. Nevertheless I did do emerge > --metadata. Is this the right time to do this? The cache format changed between portage-2.0.x and portage-2.1.x, so emerge --metadata needs to be run in order to migrate to the new format. > Should the information you sent be included in the rsync documentation? Perhaps, but not many people use portage-2.0.x these days. The 2006.1 stages contain portage-2.1.x. > In the handbook > > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=2 > > the section on > > "PORTAGE_RSYNC_OPTS sets a number of default variables used during sync, > each space-separated. These shouldn't be changed unless you know exactly > what you're doing. Note that certain absolutely required options will > always be used even if PORTAGE_RSYNC_OPTS is empty" > > does not welcome users to explore rsync. Perhaps, but again, not many people use portage-2.0.x these days. They should upgrade to 2.1.x at the first opportunity. Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGByZa/ejvha5XGaMRAulqAKDVvhVJ+0FXRB6ktlNikBklwUGLlACgmilK tXT8pRP7GcUVBmkqaoicmVA= =hJsQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- [email protected] mailing list
