[gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Mike Frysinger]

anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3 from 
KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to NPTL-0.57 
(released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the latest unstable 
version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up ... i prefer to put 
masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in package.unmask ...
-mike



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Kumba]

Mike Frysinger wrote:

> anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3 from 
> KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to NPTL-0.57 
> (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the latest unstable 
> version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up ... i prefer to put 
> masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in package.unmask ...
> -mike

I actually have the 20030822 branch update for a glibc-2.3.2-r4 if you 
want me to put that into Portage.  I thought Azarah might've gotten 
around to it by now, but he may be really busy.  I've been using this 
-r4 prototype on sparc and x86 for about 2 weeks now w/o any issues so far.


--Kumba

-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 945 bytes --]

On Friday 05 September 2003 10:57, Kumba wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3
> > from KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> > ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to
> > NPTL-0.57 (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the
> > latest unstable version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up
> > ... i prefer to put masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in
> > package.unmask ... -mike
>
> I actually have the 20030822 branch update for a glibc-2.3.2-r4 if you
> want me to put that into Portage.  I thought Azarah might've gotten
> around to it by now, but he may be really busy.  I've been using this
> -r4 prototype on sparc and x86 for about 2 weeks now w/o any issues so far.

if it includes NPTL-0.57 i'd love you long time :)
the current branch doesnt seem to compile with 0.57 while 0.56 worked fine ...
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 853 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 07:13, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3 from 
> KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to NPTL-0.57 
> (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the latest unstable 
> version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up ... i prefer to put 
> masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in package.unmask ...
> -mike

For core stuff, I especially recommend *not* using package.mask and
using KEYWORDS="-*" instead. Otherwise weird things can happen in
relation to the x86 and selinux profiles. package.mask doesn't work well
for profiles that share the same masking keyword, particularly when you
get around to removing the entry in package.mask.

Best Regards,

Daniel

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 713 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 15:13, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3 from 
> KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to NPTL-0.57 
> (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the latest unstable 
> version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up ... i prefer to put 
> masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in package.unmask ...
> -mike
> 

Not really.  Why not just keep a -r4 around though ?

> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 977 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 16:57, Kumba wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 
> > anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3 from 
> > KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> > ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to NPTL-0.57 
> > (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the latest unstable 
> > version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up ... i prefer to put 
> > masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in package.unmask ...
> > -mike
> 
> I actually have the 20030822 branch update for a glibc-2.3.2-r4 if you 
> want me to put that into Portage.  I thought Azarah might've gotten 
> around to it by now, but he may be really busy.  I've been using this 
> -r4 prototype on sparc and x86 for about 2 weeks now w/o any issues so far.
> 

Not yet please.

> 
> --Kumba
-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1258 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 17:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 05 September 2003 10:57, Kumba wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3
> > > from KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> > > ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to
> > > NPTL-0.57 (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject the
> > > latest unstable version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get screwed up
> > > ... i prefer to put masked stuff in package.mask and then unmask in
> > > package.unmask ... -mike
> >
> > I actually have the 20030822 branch update for a glibc-2.3.2-r4 if you
> > want me to put that into Portage.  I thought Azarah might've gotten
> > around to it by now, but he may be really busy.  I've been using this
> > -r4 prototype on sparc and x86 for about 2 weeks now w/o any issues so far.
> 
> if it includes NPTL-0.57 i'd love you long time :)
> the current branch doesnt seem to compile with 0.57 while 0.56 worked fine ...

Yep, need the newer sources - working on it, but just need to be sure
its ok before committing ...


-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking glibc-2.3.2-r3

[Tony Clark]

On Friday 05 September 2003 22.15, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-09-05 at 17:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 05 September 2003 10:57, Kumba wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > anyone have any qualms with me changing the masking on glibc-2.3.2-r3
> > > > from KEYWORDS="-*" to package.mask ?
> > > > ive been using it for quite sometime and was just about to update to
> > > > NPTL-0.57 (released like 2 days ago) when i realized i still inject
> > > > the latest unstable version of glibc so that my glibc's dont get
> > > > screwed up ... i prefer to put masked stuff in package.mask and then
> > > > unmask in package.unmask ... -mike
> > >
> > > I actually have the 20030822 branch update for a glibc-2.3.2-r4 if you
> > > want me to put that into Portage.  I thought Azarah might've gotten
> > > around to it by now, but he may be really busy.  I've been using this
> > > -r4 prototype on sparc and x86 for about 2 weeks now w/o any issues so
> > > far.
> >
> > if it includes NPTL-0.57 i'd love you long time :)
> > the current branch doesnt seem to compile with 0.57 while 0.56 worked
> > fine ...
>
> Yep, need the newer sources - working on it, but just need to be sure
> its ok before committing ...
Yes please, count me in as a tester.

tony
-- 
Contract ASIC and FPGA design.
Telephone +46 702 894 667
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x633E2623



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list