On 30 August 2011, at 03:27, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> …
> How can I get out of this:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild U ~] sys-apps/util-linux-2.20 [2.19.1-r1] USE="cramfs crypt
> ncurses nls perl unicode -loop-aes -old-linux (-selinux) -slang -static-libs%
> (-uclibc)"
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 05:03:21 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> I finally did this, but got further problems:
>
>
> solfire:/root>emerge --color=n -p -v --newuse --update --deep world
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild
Sebastian Beßler [11-08-30 18:01]:
> Am 30.08.2011 09:15, schrieb Pandu Poluan:
>
> > Personally, I'd put '<=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r99 ~amd64 ~x86' in that
> > file. I have the conviction that versions with greater '-r' would be
> > better, since it's a revision to the same version.
>
> '~sys-a
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 04:27:16 +0200, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> How can I get out of this:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild U ~] sys-apps/util-linux-2.20 [2.19.1-r1] USE="cramfs crypt
> ncurses nls perl unicode -loop-aes -old-linux (-selinux) -slang
> -static-libs% (-uclibc)"
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:41:48 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> Or, to be more precise, I have a common package.accept_keywords for
> all my Gentoo systems, some of them x86 and others amd64, so it's a
> habit of mine to unmask both :)
It's just as easy to unmask neither. If an entry in package.unmask
That's right. Not unknown, but incorrect.
Sorry for not writing that, I just kind of forgot.
(Been forgetful about many things, lately.)
Rgds,
On 2011-08-30, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:15:07 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
>> It is not that unknown -- in the Gentoo world -- fo
Because I don't know Meino's arch ;)
Or, to be more precise, I have a common package.accept_keywords for
all my Gentoo systems, some of them x86 and others amd64, so it's a
habit of mine to unmask both :)
Rgds,
On 2011-08-30, Sebastian Beßler wrote:
> Am 30.08.2011 09:15, schrieb Pandu Poluan:
Am 30.08.2011 09:15, schrieb Pandu Poluan:
> Personally, I'd put '<=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r99 ~amd64 ~x86' in that
> file. I have the conviction that versions with greater '-r' would be
> better, since it's a revision to the same version.
'~sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88 ~amd64 ~x86' does the same as ~
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:15:07 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
> It is not that unknown -- in the Gentoo world -- for a stable package
> to pull in an unstable package, because packages don't get stabilized
> at the same time.
It is not unknown, but it is wrong. Stable packages should never pull in
test
If you checked sysvinit's changelog, the latest (-r3) has a note about
something that sysvinit will no longer make because it's now provided
by unix-utils. (Sorry, I forgot what, exactly).
So in this case, installing sysvinit < -r3 will conflict with unix-utils.
It is not that unknown -- in the G
Hi,
is it normal/ok, that an unmasked package pulls in a masked one?
Best regards,
mcc
Pandu Poluan [11-08-30 04:56]:
> Your sysvinit is 2.88-r1. Try upgrading it to 2.88-r3, as wanted by
> util-linux.
>
> You may have to unmask it in /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords
>
> Rgds,
>
>
>
Your sysvinit is 2.88-r1. Try upgrading it to 2.88-r3, as wanted by util-linux.
You may have to unmask it in /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords
Rgds,
On 2011-08-30, meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How can I get out of this:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild U ~] sys-ap
12 matches
Mail list logo
