* [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-apps/portage: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild ChangeLog portage-2.2.0_alpha3.ebuild portage-2.2.0_alpha2.ebuild
[not found] <20101101163347.5B8A820051@flycatcher.gentoo.org>
@ 2010-11-02 22:20 ` Alexis Ballier
2010-11-03 0:21 ` Zac Medico
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Alexis Ballier @ 2010-11-02 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev, zmedico
On Monday 01 November 2010 13:33:47 Zac Medico (zmedico) wrote:
> zmedico 10/11/01 16:33:47
>
> Modified: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild
> ChangeLog portage-2.2.0_alpha3.ebuild
> portage-2.2.0_alpha2.ebuild
> Log:
> Drop keywords from portage-2.2*, as a substitute for masking via
> package.mask. This alleviates issues for cases like bug #336692 in which
> people want to use profiles to unmask portage-2.2.
Does portage 2.1 have preserve-libs? If not, pretty please, readd the ~sparc-
fbsd and ~x86-fbsd keywords. We unmasked portage 2.2 a while ago because we
relied on preserve-libs for the upgrades. Esp. one where libc.so.6 becomes
libc.so.7... without preserve-libs its almost impossible to upgrade from one
release to another one without a full reinstall.
A.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-apps/portage: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild ChangeLog portage-2.2.0_alpha3.ebuild portage-2.2.0_alpha2.ebuild
2010-11-02 22:20 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-apps/portage: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild ChangeLog portage-2.2.0_alpha3.ebuild portage-2.2.0_alpha2.ebuild Alexis Ballier
@ 2010-11-03 0:21 ` Zac Medico
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Zac Medico @ 2010-11-03 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev; +Cc: Alexis Ballier
On 11/02/2010 03:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Monday 01 November 2010 13:33:47 Zac Medico (zmedico) wrote:
>> zmedico 10/11/01 16:33:47
>>
>> Modified: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild
>> ChangeLog portage-2.2.0_alpha3.ebuild
>> portage-2.2.0_alpha2.ebuild
>> Log:
>> Drop keywords from portage-2.2*, as a substitute for masking via
>> package.mask. This alleviates issues for cases like bug #336692 in which
>> people want to use profiles to unmask portage-2.2.
>
>
> Does portage 2.1 have preserve-libs? If not, pretty please, readd the ~sparc-
> fbsd and ~x86-fbsd keywords. We unmasked portage 2.2 a while ago because we
> relied on preserve-libs for the upgrades. Esp. one where libc.so.6 becomes
> libc.so.7... without preserve-libs its almost impossible to upgrade from one
> release to another one without a full reinstall.
>
> A.
Alright, I've added back the *-fbsd keywords now.
--
Thanks,
Zac
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-11-03 0:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20101101163347.5B8A820051@flycatcher.gentoo.org>
2010-11-02 22:20 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-apps/portage: portage-2.2.0_alpha1.ebuild portage-2.2_rc67.ebuild ChangeLog portage-2.2.0_alpha3.ebuild portage-2.2.0_alpha2.ebuild Alexis Ballier
2010-11-03 0:21 ` Zac Medico
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox