»Q« wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 23:34:52 -0500
> "Walter Dnes" wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 08:23:18PM -0600, ??Q?? wrote
>>
>>> Thanks for the points you've made about how removal of a flag a user
>>> doesn't have enabled could still affect the user. I think I'll
>>> still use --changed
I think it comes down to a question of whether you're running a few
machines at home or small office, versus a large multinational outfit
with tens of thousands of machines.
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 09:27:29AM -0500, Michael Mol wrote
> Thinking about it, in your device's case, I suspect you won
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 23:34:52 -0500
"Walter Dnes" wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 08:23:18PM -0600, ??Q?? wrote
>
> > Thanks for the points you've made about how removal of a flag a user
> > doesn't have enabled could still affect the user. I think I'll
> > still use --changed-use routinely and
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 08:23:18PM -0600, ??Q?? wrote
> Thanks for the points you've made about how removal of a flag a user
> doesn't have enabled could still affect the user. I think I'll still
> use --changed-use routinely and also periodically run an update with
> --newuse.
What's the long
»Q« wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:51:01 -0600
> Dale wrote:
>
>> So, it was a bug and Zac is fixing it. Sometimes when people
>> complain, it is because something is not working as it should.
>
> I never saw Hilco as complaining, just questioning. And in the
> post you quoted (and which I've
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 14:51:01 -0600
Dale wrote:
> So, it was a bug and Zac is fixing it. Sometimes when people
> complain, it is because something is not working as it should.
I never saw Hilco as complaining, just questioning. And in the
post you quoted (and which I've snipped), Hilco basicall
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:26:45 +0200
Alan McKinnon wrote:
> --changed-use is intended for cases like a flag you are not using at
> all goes away. Caveat: Even then it could still break in subtle ways
> with dodgy ebuilds. Caveat emptor.
Thanks for the points you've made about how removal of a flag
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:45:25 -0800
Hilco Wijbenga wrote:
> > But is this not a case where the kde eclass *explictly* set the USE
> > flag off? (Disclaimer: haven't read the eclass). In that case
> > portage would not know what to do when the flag goes away so the
> > behaviour we saw would not re
On 21 January 2012 03:26, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:00:52 -0600
> »Q« wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:06:22 +
>> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>
>> > I suspect this is
>> > specific to the KDE ebuilds (or eclass). changed-use should only
>> > skip an ebuild with changed flags
>> "If your currently installed version of python reported by python -V
>> is less than 2.6 then you must choose a version of portage that is
>> compatible with it. If you have at least python 2.6 then use
>> portage-2.1.10.41.tar.bz2. If you have python 2.4 or 2.5 then use
>> portage-2.1.6.tar.bz2
On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 06:57:32 -0800, Grant wrote:
> "If your currently installed version of python reported by python -V
> is less than 2.6 then you must choose a version of portage that is
> compatible with it. If you have at least python 2.6 then use
> portage-2.1.10.41.tar.bz2. If you have pytho
On 1/21/2012 01:56 PM, Daniel da Veiga wrote:
> If its not being used and outage is not a problem, I would recommend
> reinstalling. I'm against doying it, but 2 years is a lot, if you have
> any servers (MySQL, PHP) it would be an issue, you'll have MAJOR
> changes to X, OpenRC and I'm not even ta
On 20 January 2012, at 23:58, Grant wrote:
>> OK, so the install is old and portage has dependencies, right?
>>
>> emerge -pvDuN portage
>>
>> will get you closer. However this is probably best covered using
>> Neil's suggestion of
>>
>> emerge -pvDuN @system
>
> I can't even get started:
>
On Jan 20, 2012, at 9:36 PM, "Walter Dnes" wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:45:08AM -0600, Chris Frederick wrote
>
>> If you still want private addresses, IPv6 has unique local addresses
>> (fc00::/7 range, http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula/ has a reg form to
>> help assign a /48 to you).
>
If its not being used and outage is not a problem, I would recommend
reinstalling. I'm against doying it, but 2 years is a lot, if you have
any servers (MySQL, PHP) it would be an issue, you'll have MAJOR
changes to X, OpenRC and I'm not even talking about the kernel, udev,
etc.
I would back it up
>> # emerge -avDuN system
>> [snip]
>> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=sys-auth/pambase-20081028" have
>> been masked.
>> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your
>> request:
>> - sys-auth/pambase-20101024-r1 (masked by: EAPI 4)
>>
On 01/20/2012 11:48 PM, Grant wrote:
You don't have to do the entire stage3 at once,
http://tinderbox.dev.gentoo.org/
has precompiled packages for the major arches and profiles. You could try to
replace just pambase, pam, python, etc. -- whatever's giving you trouble.
This was not my first
>> # emerge -avDuN system
>> [snip]
>> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=sys-auth/pambase-20081028" have
>> been masked.
>> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your
>> request:
>> - sys-auth/pambase-20101024-r1 (masked by: EAPI 4)
>>
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Grant Edwards
wrote:
> On 2012-01-19, Michael Mol wrote:
>
Do you really want that much broadcast and wide multicast (think
DNS-SD and NTP in multicast mode) traffic on the same Ethernet
segment?
>>>
>>> That bit I don't understand. ??It's no worse
On 21 January 2012 04:48, Grant wrote:
> # emerge -avDuN system
> [snip]
> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=sys-auth/pambase-20081028" have
> been masked.
> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your
> request:
> - sys-auth/pambase-201010
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 11:00:52 -0600
»Q« wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 12:06:22 +
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
> > I suspect this is
> > specific to the KDE ebuilds (or eclass). changed-use should only
> > skip an ebuild with changed flags if re-emerging would produce
> > exactly the same code as
On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:57:31 -0800 (PST), BRM wrote:
> As the system starts to boot-up, it switches like it is going to start
> X - changing a video mode somehow. I don't have xdm in the runlevels
> yet, so it can't be starting XDM at all.This seems to happen right
> after udevd is started, while
On Saturday 21 January 2012, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 01/20/2012 09:42 PM, Grant wrote:
> >>> # emerge -avDuN system
> >>> [snip]
> >>> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=sys-auth/pambase-20081028"
> >>> have been masked.
> >>> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete
23 matches
Mail list logo
