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 1EEiST-0003Zy-Ul for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 07:10:30 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8C75BjH019353; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 07:05:11 GMT Received: from mail.t-systems.cz (mail.t-systems.cz [212.67.76.249]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8C6vRxh018687 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 06:57:27 GMT Received: from mefisto.t-systems.cz (faust.t-systems.cz [10.246.110.12]) by mail.t-systems.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA15C89A5C for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 09:01:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from andre.t-systems.cz ([10.246.112.240]) by mefisto.t-systems.cz with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 12 Sep 2005 09:01:41 +0200 Received: andre.t-systems.cz 10.246.112.240 from 10.246.112.176 10.246.112.176 via HTTP with MS-WebStorage 6.5.6944 Received: from frankies by andre.t-systems.cz; 12 Sep 2005 09:00:51 +0200 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Nasty bugs in portage? From: Frank Schafer To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200509111912.51475.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> References: <1126375769.5733.59.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200509111838.37092.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> <642958cc0509110958794615f7@mail.gmail.com> <200509111912.51475.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 09:00:51 +0200 Message-Id: <1126508451.5947.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Sep 2005 07:01:41.0386 (UTC) FILETIME=[D3DC1EA0:01C5B767] X-T-Systems_Czech-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-T-Systems_Czech-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=-5.853, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -3.30, AWL 0.05, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-MailScanner-From: frank.schafer@t-systems.cz X-Archives-Salt: f62889b0-4e70-4348-8104-bcd8a203326c X-Archives-Hash: b24d263e781b17bbfa5a5728fd396f58 On Sun, 2005-09-11 at 19:12 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > On Sunday 11 September 2005 18:58, Mark Shields wrote: > > >From http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=1&chap=6: > > > > // start quote > > > > Building the System > > > > To start building the system, execute emerge --emptytree system. Then > > go do something to keep your mind busy, because this step takes a > > long time to complete. > > > > > > Code Listing 22: Building the System > > # emerge --emptytree system > > > > > > > > Again, if you haven't touched the default CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS > > setting, using --newuse is sufficient. > > > > // end quote > > > > So you see, it does tell you to do an emerge --emptytree system, > > unless you haven't changed the defalt CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS, in which case > > you can just use the --newuse in place of --emptytree. > > > and this one: > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/2005.1/handbook-x86.xml?full=1 > > does not talk about --emptytree at all, so which one is correct? > > (btw, when I installed my gentoo --emptytree was totally not needed.) > Then ``emerge system'' didn't replace the packages installed by ``sbin/bootstrap.sh'' with new ones (which are probably built with different compiler settings). Frank -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list