On Thursday 07 April 2005 01:17, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> I was more talking about the virtual/pam-modules (or whatever). Having
> a a PDEPEND is just fine.
I was thinking of the virtual for future expansion on NetBSD and other, but
this is probably better done using an || PDEPEND when it will b
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 09:22:33AM +0200, Diego Flameeyes Pettenò wrote:
> I was thinking of the virtual for future expansion on NetBSD and other, but
> this is probably better done using an || PDEPEND when it will be needed.
That's interesting.
Is anybody planning or working on a NetBSD port of
Hi,
#gentoo-uk are trying to organise Gentoo's attendance at the Linux World
UK Expo, if you're interested in attending/helping out, please have a
look at our co-ordination page on the Gentoo UK website:
http://gentoo.linux.co.uk/events/linuxworld05/
Please sign up and register for the event on
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 07:28:31PM +0200, Adrian Lambeck wrote:
> Everybody thanks for the feedback to my GLEP(35).
> The discussion about it started on 2005/03/13.
>
> What I figured out so far is that some proposed changes are already covered
> in
> repoman.That is even better because some of
On Thursday 07 April 2005 15:20, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> if package.prefer contained "dev-java/kaffe" then:
>
>
>
> || (
> dev-java/blackdown-jdk
> dev-java/sun-jdk
> dev-java/kaffe
> )
>
> would be processed as:
>
>
>
>
One thing... Maybe its just me... or maybe they are in no way related,
but I seem to have heard of a lot more 'libtool' problems when using a
snapshot version instead of a regularly numbered version, is there a
reason?
On Apr 7, 2005 11:46 PM, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> can stable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Mike Frysinger wrote:
can stable uses of gcc-3.3.5-r1 upgrade to gcc-3.3.5.20050110-r1 and see if
they hit any fun and exciting bugs ?
Uh, there isn't any such thing. If you mean this:
Mon Mar 21 14:05:58 2005 >>> sys-devel/gcc-3.3.
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 07:19:06AM -0400, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> One thing... Maybe its just me... or maybe they are in no way related,
> but I seem to have heard of a lot more 'libtool' problems when using a
> snapshot version instead of a regularly numbered version, is there a
> reason?
Maybe you
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 10:46:35PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> can stable uses of gcc-3.3.5-r1 upgrade to gcc-3.3.5.20050110-r1 and see if
> they hit any fun and exciting bugs ?
it works nicely here. it compiles and can compile sed.
no bugs, no fun :(
--
stefan
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 11:35:19AM +, Ferris McCormick wrote:
> Uh, there isn't any such thing. If you mean this:
> Mon Mar 21 14:05:58 2005 >>> sys-devel/gcc-3.3.5.20050130-r1
> it's been stable on sparc for 2.5 weeks.
>
> Or did you mean this instead?
> gcc-3.4.3.20050110-r1
mike, I was te
On Thursday 07 April 2005 11:46 pm, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> gcc-3.3.5.20050110-r1
sorry, ive been hacking on both the 3.3.5 and 3.4.3 snapshots lately and i
thought they were both made 20050110 ...
i am looking for 3.3.5.20050130-r1 to be tested for stable
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing
The adoption of MySQL is waiting for robbat2 finishing the exams
(devaway say april 22). Plus probably he will need few days of holidays
after ;-)
In the meantime can you fix/close theese bugs (that block 83011)?
85783 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - net-libs/libwww-5.4.0 patch to avoid
USE_OLD_FUNCTIONS i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 09:22:33AM +0200, Diego Flameeyes Pettenï wrote:
>
>>I was thinking of the virtual for future expansion on NetBSD and other, but
>>this is probably better done using an || PDEPEND when it will be neede
On Friday 08 April 2005 20:32, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Diego is more than welcome to play around with NetBSD, but officially the
> BSD team decided to worry about getting one flavor working nicely before
> moving on to porting another one.
Actually, as I don't know anything about NetBSD (well, I knew
Why was the x86-1.4 profile deleted? I have several machines that after
a `emerge sync` now have a non-functional profile:
# ls -ld make.profile
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root39 Nov 14 2003 make.profile ->
../usr/portage/profiles/default-x86-1.4
# ls -ld ../usr/portage/profiles/default-x86-1.4
David Sparks wrote:
Why was the x86-1.4 profile deleted? I have several machines that after
a `emerge sync` now have a non-functional profile:
because 2004.0 is the same as 1.4 (don't ask where I've readed it)
# ls -ld make.profile
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root39 Nov 14 2003 make.profile ->
../u
On Friday 08 April 2005 07:35 pm, David Sparks wrote:
> Why was the x86-1.4 profile deleted?
this was announced quite a while ago
> I tried symlinking make.profile to a newer profile and got this:
unlink that profile, update your portage to the latest version, and then set
the profile to defaul
Francesco Riosa wrote:
> David Sparks wrote:
>
>> Why was the x86-1.4 profile deleted? I have several machines that after
>> a `emerge sync` now have a non-functional profile:
>>
>>
> because 2004.0 is the same as 1.4 (don't ask where I've readed it)
I tried linking to 2004.0 and got the same
On Friday 08 April 2005 07:57 pm, David Sparks wrote:
> !!! ARCH is not set... Are you missing the /etc/make.profile symlink?
> !!! Is the symlink correct? Is your portage tree complete?
so use 'default-x86-2004.2', emerge portage, and then switch to the cascading
version
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gent
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 08 April 2005 07:57 pm, David Sparks wrote:
>
>>!!! ARCH is not set... Are you missing the /etc/make.profile symlink?
>>!!! Is the symlink correct? Is your portage tree complete?
>
>
> so use 'default-x86-2004.2', emerge portage, and then switch to the cascading
On Friday 08 April 2005 08:24 pm, David Sparks wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 08 April 2005 07:57 pm, David Sparks wrote:
> >>!!! ARCH is not set... Are you missing the /etc/make.profile symlink?
> >>!!! Is the symlink correct? Is your portage tree complete?
> >
> > so use 'default-x8
Question here - I made the link to the 2005.0 profile on (NOT 2005.0/2.4)
a system that is 2.6.11 and has been on 2.6 for months. Tonight emerge
-uD system -p wants to "upgrade" me to a 2.4 kernel!!! Well, portage this
is a 2.6.x system - not 2.4 - duh! From what I found in the mail list
arc
On Friday 08 April 2005 08:35 pm, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> In short - what do we have to do to upgrade to a current profile on 2.6
> machines and get 2.6 gentoo-source updates, not 2.4.
if you use 'default-linux/x86/2005.0' as your profile, it should be giving you
2.6 kernels ... in order to get
>>Thanks for the suggestions, I've tried 2004.0 .1 .2 .3 with similar
>>results as below.
>
>
> you didnt use the one i suggested the 2nd time around ...
Opps, I didn't notice I was using the wrong directory!
Thanks for the help.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Nope. I got 2.4 when I logged in, did an emerge -uD system -p. I went back
and created the symlink to 2005.0 again and now it appears to work - I
even rebooted. However, I did NOT have a symlink to 2.4 so who knows.
Here's the output (before recreating the symlink)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] brett $ eme
On Friday 08 April 2005 09:21 pm, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> Nope. I got 2.4 when I logged in, did an emerge -uD system -p. I went back
> and created the symlink to 2005.0 again and now it appears to work - I
> even rebooted. However, I did NOT have a symlink to 2.4 so who knows.
well if you can r
Will do - I know I saw it once!!!
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Friday 08 April 2005 09:21 pm, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
Nope. I got 2.4 when I logged in, did an emerge -uD system -p. I went back
and created the symlink to 2005.0 again and now it appears to work - I
even rebooted. How
On Friday 08 April 2005 19:48, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> I think that even without this glep portage might be patched to sort or
> lists. Currently the first get picked. We might want to change that to
> preferring packages that do allready have an installed version above ones
> that don't.
This sho
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
29 matches
Mail list logo
