On 18 Nov 2008, at 20:13, Michael Higgins wrote:
...
All I can say (beyond WTF) is *wow*, someone did something knowing
it would/could/did create havoc, but didn't bother to broadcast it
to those it would affect.
That's because havoc is The Gentoo Way (tm).
:D
Stroller.
After the better part of an hour spent manually unmasking inexplicably
newly-masked dependencies of installed packages, I finally:
grep dev-perl /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask /etc/portage/package.unmask
... so I could [EMAIL PROTECTED]*()_ get on with an updated system.
So, did anyone on
Michael Higgins schrieb am 18.11.2008 20:51:
some stuff
From the gentoo-dev mailing list!
http://groups.google.com/group/linux.gentoo.dev/browse_thread/thread/f9c2abaea5e391b2#
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:51:06 -0800
Michael Higgins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To follow up, since I posted to the list, I got a reply from the maintainer who
did this, who referred me here:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247413#c1
Which also contains the explanation, Some perl modules
On Tuesday 18 November 2008 21:51:06 Michael Higgins wrote:
I've often wondered (more and more often now it seems) where I can get a
heads up that the devs are about to cause major pain. Is there such a
beast?
Never do I see an announcement on the -dev list like, hey guys, check it
out:
On Tuesday 18 November 2008 22:13:14 Michael Higgins wrote:
At least now I know what happened, but not why it was allowed to happen. I
suppose having an inconsistent tree is a risk with any packages maintained
by gentoo folks? If so, why doesn't this happen more often? Hmm.
Because the time
6 matches
Mail list logo
