From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1P23hn-0007g3-Pu for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 15:08:56 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C5322E072B; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 15:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DD1DE072B for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2010 15:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyf28 with SMTP id 28so5402065wyf.40 for ; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 08:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.22.70 with SMTP id s48mr3343412wes.27.1286032113974; Sat, 02 Oct 2010 08:08:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.28.8.1] (host249-252-static.95-94-b.business.telecomitalia.it [94.95.252.249]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x33sm1620871weq.23.2010.10.02.08.08.32 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 02 Oct 2010 08:08:33 -0700 (PDT) Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Diego_Elio_Petten=C3=B2?= Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Notice: possible past, present and future breakage related to .la files From: Diego Elio =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Petten=F2?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <4CA74825.1050505@gmail.com> References: <1285800006.6591.313.camel@yamato.local> <1286020299.8777.0.camel@rattus> <1286022959.6591.620.camel@yamato.local> <4CA74825.1050505@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:08:20 +0200 Message-ID: <1286032100.6591.625.camel@yamato.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 073225f6-2ec2-4253-9e00-1585791e5f34 X-Archives-Hash: cb2595741fdad688e6cf8230c8dd2d02 Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 09.56 -0500, Dale ha scritto: >=20 > Still on topic but I have a question and you are in the know on > this. =20 > I'm running unstable portage, 2.2_rc67 to be exact. Does this new a=20 > version of portage take care of this already? It sounds like it is > the=20 > stable portage that has issues. I been running unstable for a long=20 > while now.=20 2.2 series does support this but I don't know which one of the RCs added it; latest ~arch/masked version is fine though, so you might just upgrade to that and you're done :) --=20 Diego Elio Petten=C3=B2 =E2=80=94 =E2=80=9CFlameeyes=E2=80=9D http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/