From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1GzkYS-0000w0-6I for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 28 Dec 2006 01:59:36 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kBS1vj0L007097; Thu, 28 Dec 2006 01:57:45 GMT Received: from brego.pewamo.office ([207.241.133.40]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kBS1vhiB021010 for ; Thu, 28 Dec 2006 01:57:44 GMT Received: by brego.pewamo.office (Postfix, from userid 500) id 881B9108FE7; Wed, 27 Dec 2006 20:57:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 20:57:43 -0500 From: Michael George To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: problems emerging tclx Message-ID: <20061228015743.GA6475@brego.pewamo.office> References: <20061227111653.GA32181@brego.pewamo.office> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Archives-Salt: a92011cc-f95e-478a-8172-4a76574baa32 X-Archives-Hash: 05ec14455fd1170441d0647a1dcd849a On Thu, Dec 28, 2006 at 01:00:00AM +0000, Duncan wrote: > > I don't have it merged here, but your net search apparently didn't include > a Gentoo bug search. Note that google (and presumably other websearch > engines) doesn't know how to index bugzilla pages very well, so you have > to search them separately. You are right, I didn't search the gentoo bugs, but I shall in the future. I didn't know that Google wouldn't grab them... > Anyway, a quick search from http://bugs.gentoo.org on "ALL tclx", then > skipping to the bottom of the list since the bugs are in numerical order > and we are interested in something fairly new, yields a number of dups of > this bug: > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133099 > > It doesn't say what I was looking for directly, but it mentions related > emacspeak bug > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148854 > > which mentions (as you suspected) that the problem is a gcc-4.1 > incompatibility. There's tclx-8.4-r1 in the tree as ~amd64 and already > x86 stable, which compiles with gcc-4.1. However, certain packages that > depend on tclx apparently don't have a stable version in portage that can > handle tclx-8.4, so all those packages pretty much need to stabilize > together, and if one or more of them have other amd64 issues... > > So, bottom line, tclx-8.4-r1 is currently keyworded ~amd64. It works with > gcc-4.1, but since some stable versions of packages that depend on tclx > aren't 8.4 compatible, be prepared to package.keyword any of them too, in > ordered to get them working again after upgrading tclx. > > Or simply wait until everything is stabilized, staying with your gcc-3.4 > built version until then. The choice is yours. =8^) Excellent information. Thanks to all who answered my plea! -- -M There are 10 kinds of people in this world: Those who can count in binary and those who cannot. -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list