On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 16:12:49 +0200, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Monday 02 November 2009 15:58:57 Jesús Guerrero wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:25:08 +, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:58:03 +0100, Jesús Guerrero wrote:
@preserved-rebuild
Jesús Guerrero i92gu...@terra.es writes:
Thanks for the feedback. However there's one thing I can't understand:
whether the libraries are kept of removed is decided at the merge time,
isn't it? So, whatever breaks, breaks when using emerge to update the
offending library, the one that will
On Monday 02 November 2009 17:01:17 Jesús Guerrero wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 16:12:49 +0200, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Monday 02 November 2009 15:58:57 Jesús Guerrero wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:25:08 +, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
On Mon, 02
Jesús Guerrero writes:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 16:12:49 +0200, Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday 02 November 2009 15:58:57 Jesús Guerrero wrote:
On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:25:08 +, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk
wrote:
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:58:03 +0100, Jesús
Thanks everyone for the input, it's being quite informative and valuable.
I guess I'll have to research on this at some point. Still I'd like to keep
responses coming if anyone can bring some light into the issue. :)
I am responding only to one post, but I've read Alan's one as well, as
said,
On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:40:35 +, Graham Murray wrote:
The difference is that with the new @preserved-rebuild the 'old' library
is not deleted until all of the dependent packages have been
successfully rebuilt to use the 'new' library.
This also means that if you don't run emerge
6 matches
Mail list logo
