From: "Collins Richey" <erichey2@home.com>
To: <gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GlibC
Date: Tue Jun 5 20:52:02 2001 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <012701c0ee34$eae414a0$10760641@aurora1.co.home.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 006d01c0edc2$720f0840$840aa8c0@icgroup.nl
I don't have access to my archive right now, but I remember that Achim said
you need to update the compiler before trying to update glibc.
--
Collins Richey
Denver area
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mathijs Kwik (-=TRoXX=-)" <troxx@segfault.nl>
To: <gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 7:20 AM
Subject: [gentoo-dev] GlibC
> Safe upgrading? :)
>
> I tried 2 things which both fail...
> using build-tarball:
> changing the bootstrap-file to use glibc-2.2.3-r1 instead of 2.2.3
> the build-tarball has 2.2.3-r1 allready installed so installing 2.2.3
would
> be stupid(but it's still in the bootstrap-file).
>
> and i also tried installing 2.2.3-r1 on a system with system=tarball
> extracted... which also has 2.2.3-r1 in it.
>
>
> so in both those cases I 'upgrade' a package to itself.
> and in both cases it breaks everything on the system...
> I don't know what exactly happens on the build-system.
> but on the system-system(wow:) I end up having a 0-byte libc-2.2.3.so
>
> so I don't know why this is... it's very easy to regenerate te error (did
it
> a few times, I thought it was just me:)
>
> so either portage has a buggy, or glibc 2.2.3-r1.ebuild is buggy (because
I
> never got it to build+installed using portage).
>
> please fix this or help me :)
>
>
> ---
>
>
> another small thing I don't like (and I'm not the only one, I spoke some
> guys on #gentoo who think the same)
> the portage-tree is TOOOO big :)
> there are things in it like diffs(some quite big) and even the
> logo-header-file(almost 2M).
> can't we just put all files/* stuff in a separate place on ibiblio/cvs and
> put them in ebuild-files? (or let portage check if there are any
> diffs/patches/additions)
> I mean the portage-tree should just contain enough info to download+build
> everything...
> having diff's in there for packages that I'm not gonna install anyway
seems
> useless to me.
>
> It's about 20M now... should be possible to reduce it to 2Mb :)
> not because of bandwith, just for clean design.
> Some others DO care about bandwith, which I can understand also.
>
>
> Greetings
> /Mathijs
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
> http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-06 2:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-05 7:22 [gentoo-dev] GlibC Mathijs Kwik (-=TRoXX=-)
2001-06-05 20:52 ` Collins Richey [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-01-24 19:19 [gentoo-dev] glibc Christian Loitsch
2003-01-30 0:38 Steven Lucy
2003-01-30 3:40 ` Nicholas Hockey
2003-01-30 4:20 ` Steven Lucy
2003-02-03 21:41 ` Martin Schlemmer
2003-02-03 22:11 ` Matt Tucker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='012701c0ee34$eae414a0$10760641@aurora1.co.home.com' \
--to=erichey2@home.com \
--cc=gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox