Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:13 AM, wrote:
> > Rich Freeman wrote:
> >>
> >> Sounds like this is covered by:
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558168
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=02
> >>
> >> It seems to me like this is a portage issue with the
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:13 AM, wrote:
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> Sounds like this is covered by:
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558168
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=02
>>
>> It seems to me like this is a portage issue with the resolver.
>> Running emerge -1 python-
On 01/09/2015 13:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>>> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>>
On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
>>>
>>> It looks like f
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Got it, finally :-)
> >
> > fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
> > highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
> > not have the flag at all.
> >
> > You
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >
> >> On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
> >
> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
On 01/09/2015 12:18, Marc Joliet_1 wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:55:12 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> Got it, finally :-)
>>
>> fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
>> highest version with an expl
On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:55:12 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
[...]
>
>Got it, finally :-)
>
>fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
>highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
>not have th
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Got it, finally :-)
>
> fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
> highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
> not have the flag at all.
>
> Your choices are either to have fail2ban
On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
>
> It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
> true reason is still hidden. Th
Jeremi Piotrowski wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> > portage, certainly the systemd one.
> > emerge --info
> > Portage 2.2.20.1 (python 2.7.10-final-0,
> > default/linux/amd64/13.0/de
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
> >> >
> >> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
> >> > true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
> >> >
> >> > RDEPEND=
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
[snip]
> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> portage, certainly the systemd one.
> emerge --info
> Portage 2.2.20.1 (python 2.7.10-final-0,
> default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome, gcc-4.9.3, glibc-2.21-r1,
> 3.1
On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
>> >
>> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
>> > true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
>> >
>> > RDEPEND="
>> > ...
>> > syste
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:54:47 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>
> > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ask --color=n --verbose --nospinner
> > --autounmask=n --quiet-build=n"
>
> Get rid of the --verbose flag as a default. Part of the reason the output
> from portage is so confus
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:54:47 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ask --color=n --verbose --nospinner
> --autounmask=n --quiet-build=n"
Get rid of the --verbose flag as a default. Part of the reason the output
from portage is so confusing is that there is so much of it, -
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 16:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >
> >> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
> >
> > sysv-utils? (
> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
>
On 31/08/2015 16:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
>
> sysv-utils? (
> !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> !sys-apps/sysvinit
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
> >> >
> >> > sysv-utils? (
> >> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> >> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
> >> >
> >> > That's a hard blocker, no way rou
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 02:40:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
> >> >
> >> > sysv-utils? (
> >> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> >> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
> >> >
On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
>> >
>> > sysv-utils? (
>> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
>> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
>> >
>> > That's a hard blocker, no way round it. It's in all the systemd ebuilds
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 13:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >
> >> On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> answers interleaved
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> >>> unable to fig
On 31/08/2015 13:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> answers interleaved
>>
>>
>>> Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
>>> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the relate
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>
>
> answers interleaved
>
>
> > Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> > unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> > with inserted comments. I am using "
On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
answers interleaved
> Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> with inserted comments. I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> ncurs
Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:19:08 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>
> > Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> > unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> > with inserted comments. I am using "unstable" gentoo
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:19:08 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> with inserted comments. I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> ncurses-6 for
Hi. On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
with inserted comments. I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
ncurses-6 for the time being. Portage also wants to downgrade my
systemd from 221(0/2)
27 matches
Mail list logo