John P. Burkett wrote: > > Alan, > Thank you very much for your diagnosis and suggestion. Having no > experience downgrading packages, I'm not certain how to implement the > proposal to downgrade ftgl. The approach I tried is the following: > I created a /usr/portage/package.mask file containing the line > =media-libs/ftgl-2.1.3_rc5 > and then did > emerge -C ftgl > which removed ftgl-2.l.3_rc5. > Then I did > emerge ftgl > expecting to get a lower version. Instead, ftgl-2.l.3_rc5 was emerged > again. > So, if you'll forgive such a basic question, how should ftgl be downgraded? > > John > > > >
I got this: r...@smoker / # equery list -p ftgl [ Searching for package 'ftgl' in all categories among: ] * installed packages * Portage tree (/usr/portage) [-P-] [ ] media-libs/ftgl-2.1.2-r1 (0) [-P-] [M~] media-libs/ftgl-2.1.2-r2 (0) [-P-] [ ] media-libs/ftgl-2.1.3_rc5 (0) r...@smoker / # So, I would try this "emerge -va =media-libs/ftgl-2.1.2-r1" and see if that version works since it was the last stable version, without the quotes of course. Keep in mind, you have not masked anything so if you run "emerge -u world" it will try to upgrade. I would find a working version first, then mask/unmask. That way you know what to mask/unmask. I hope that works for you. Dale :-) :-)
