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 4.50) id 1EfHnC-0001aL-7K for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 14:09:42 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAOE8DIb023334; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 14:08:13 GMT Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org (66-191-187-123.dhcp.gnvl.sc.charter.com [66.191.187.123]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAOE2bGD030376 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 14:02:37 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E96424801F for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:53:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gravity.twi-31o2.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20051-09 for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:52:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from vertigo.twi-31o2.org (vertigo.twi-31o2.org [192.168.0.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14DB024801E for ; Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:52:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Multi hash support in portage - status From: Chris Gianelloni To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200511242057.07443.jstubbs@gentoo.org> References: <20051124010432.33eecead@sven.genone.homeip.net> <200511240949.20888.jstubbs@gentoo.org> <20051124020736.2ddafa2a@sven.genone.homeip.net> <200511242057.07443.jstubbs@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-kHlQTSaNnYI4YWMxTbmG" Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:01:59 -0500 Message-Id: <1132840919.19957.6.camel@vertigo.twi-31o2.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at twi-31o2.org X-Archives-Salt: b889413b-b807-4397-9d0a-01950efa702a X-Archives-Hash: 3b349d70941da67e61b8e0250635280a --=-kHlQTSaNnYI4YWMxTbmG Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 20:57 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > Nope, not missing anything. Thought I said it, compability isn't a > > reason to hold this up anymore, only asking if people want multi-hashes > > now at the expense of a bigger tree when Manifest2 comes along. >=20 > I'm referring to portage-2.0.50 and below. What exactly needs to be done = by=20 > those few that are still using it to upgrade to a better portage after it= =20 > dies on finding SHA1 sums in portage's digest? They would need to redigest portage/sandbox with their version of portage, as you said. They would need to create a symlink from /etc/make.profile to /usr/portage/profiles/obsolete/$arch, then they would need to emerge --oneshot sandbox portage. After that, they can upgrade to a supported profile. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux --=-kHlQTSaNnYI4YWMxTbmG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDhcfXkT4lNIS36YERAl1zAJ9g5w0h70XQLUx1to36gsD3PPnVKgCfYRBd Y54mLue9DeyduOB/apNpVPw= =2SM6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-kHlQTSaNnYI4YWMxTbmG-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list