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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FvNnK-0004pD-QL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 00:20:39 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k5S0H3OM016762; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 00:17:03 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5S0H0Ng004837 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 00:17:00 GMT Received: from home.wh0rd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D62E64DBF for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2006 00:16:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 8185 invoked from network); 27 Jun 2006 20:07:30 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 27 Jun 2006 20:07:30 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-embedded] portage patching fails with busybox's patch Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:22:29 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: Joshua ChaitinPollak References: In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-embedded@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2530478.kVuIthYGO3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200606272022.29471.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: a0f53d79-4b92-42d3-a3cf-8d2ebb964105 X-Archives-Hash: a7ea1dcda783c9b481d231074d32b970 --nextPart2530478.kVuIthYGO3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 27 June 2006 18:28, Joshua ChaitinPollak wrote: > when emerging, portage passes the patch command the -g option, but > busybox doesn't support this and fails. Is there a way to prevent > portage from using -g edit EPATCH_OPTS in /usr/portage/eclass/eutils.eclass > or is this a bug I should file?=20 certainly not, unless you file the bug with busybox to add support for -g =2Dmike --nextPart2530478.kVuIthYGO3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iQIVAwUARKHLxUFjO5/oN/WBAQKP2BAA5Y2y4pCSct9S4FIAQdgIr6iTvNbCaBvj T6oLIVlTGGFStOw7/MMieZXcz4Yr7AhHnSdgSCazS+bIaziCprNfdzZfmQd3ISES LtMNo+XZVoim1uKcIqi8DLKp+6N1e9k+kXnL2jXKaRJU4odW7FZ6HPDyj8J+PqXB Pa4+fRyXwID4XPbd6Pp2KzBAoXoAQuhBQwarup3CoayFWvkeHjyIAHwP5jABpLoL hbk4m4dcT4Hpq2d/r/onTtb87c66qMNCZ5bW3pKp1e83Q4vLB1XOGM6dK0qlpchG Dfcp/4JKgtmj0+K3Wo2DOhn2apLK+vdBBbyYiT0arIhE3XYZfzt82iXkZJ+LqRHF V42kAaQJZRJdUa5VVth+AN/tpxKnlOByBmih5PsV/QJAkTwjWrM2GQ4mCb0kM6Ew kYatzI+rX6R56q3br1GqL7QqaedETIVzSlWxCmVSgfqeVtQO51iVFSY1agFSyyyi gGAy+UQIDRoodmRLgKxEToMdS/Si+tOhqyahDRPi2R9C9kyb2h2Zh+Ze0VhbQsiy gZF8Vjwz799qNWGtBVQFL9U8UgebMwLoSiEc7CdBiXpC4qxljZf5+1DHZD2lsL4G syAvzre21Km9S2cVKR+eNQhY7h8VLpz3C1ioaGbBpmnQ8QCNkHah6ccARXxiWTt5 fKB+61H1PjI= =r3Kz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2530478.kVuIthYGO3-- -- gentoo-embedded@gentoo.org mailing list