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 4.43) id 1EGaD3-0001Va-Ad for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:46:17 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8HAeMqv006897; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:40:22 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8HAc9Pd009428 for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:38:09 GMT Received: from anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net ([194.217.242.88]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EGaAF-00035d-Cv for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:43:23 +0000 Received: from derived-software.demon.co.uk ([83.104.60.195] helo=derisoft.derived-software.demon.co.uk) by anchor-post-30.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1EGaAF-0006UC-1f for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:43:23 +0000 Received: by derisoft.derived-software.demon.co.uk (Postfix, from userid 9) id 2C1B79F36B; Sat, 17 Sep 2005 11:43:23 +0100 (BST) Received: from 127.0.0.1 by 127.0.0.1 with nntp; 17 Sep 2005 11:43:23 BST To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Phil Richards Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 2.12.0 Final - Testing References: In-Reply-To: Organization: Derived Software Ltd X-Newsreader: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux) NNTP-Posting-Host: 127.0.0.1 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 10:43:23 -0000 Message-Id: <20050917104323.2C1B79F36B@derisoft.derived-software.demon.co.uk> Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 11:43:23 +0100 (BST) 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 X-Archives-Salt: b6712d70-6687-4970-8deb-cca940707b25 X-Archives-Hash: a6c4d91c1dcce6198c3c38ef162e47aa On 2005-09-14, John N. Laliberte wrote: > The GNOME herd is now ready for 2.12.0 to be tested. > The gnome-2.12.0.ebuild should hit the mirrors shortly. ( just committed) > Please see this document for information on how to test: > http://dev.gentoo.org/~allanonjl/gnome/2.12.0/testing.instructions.txt I might be being stupid, but having suitably unmasked what was suggested I get: | ~ # emerge -puv --newuse gnome | | These are the packages that I would merge, in order: | | Calculating dependencies \ | !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "sys-apps/pmount" have been masked. | !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request: | - sys-apps/pmount-0.9.3-r3 (masked by: package.mask) | # Doug Goldstein (7 Sep 2005) | # Remasking because the Gnome herd is too lazy to look | # into bugs that are over 4 months old with regards to | # hal and dbus. Patches provided and everything. | # When I volunteered to fix it and handle any issues.. | # I received the stock "wait for foser" response. | | For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man page or | section 2.2 "Software Availability" in the Gentoo Handbook. | !!! (dependency required by "gnome-base/gnome-vfs-2.12.0" [ebuild]) Normally, I would just unmask pmount, but the comment doesn't exactly fill me with confidence as regards the stability of pmount (and whereas I am happy for gnome to crash in a heap, I tend to be a little more cautious around things that work at lower levels in the system)... Should I just go ahead and unmask, or what if I want to test out gnome 2.12? phil -- change name before "@" to "phil" for email -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list