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 4.50) id 1EcVEu-0006TF-91 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:54:48 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAGLrU21001074; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:53:30 GMT Received: from mail2.performics.com (mail2.performics.com [63.240.137.252]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAGLmblE000221 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:48:38 GMT Received: from [172.18.33.41] ([172.18.33.41]) by mail2.performics.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:53:27 -0600 From: Jeff Smelser To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo still on the right path? Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:50:58 -0600 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <9999810b0511160820h648eb1a5o4f62300507c2b8a9@mail.gmail.com> <342e1090511161153p1fbbf3dex27a4f9603b23d7de@mail.gmail.com> <9999810b0511161250h3b1cbdfcvbd1ff493660cf3b8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9999810b0511161250h3b1cbdfcvbd1ff493660cf3b8@mail.gmail.com> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5443514.Nl5R8Ek8FW"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200511161551.00800.tradergt@gmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Nov 2005 21:53:27.0303 (UTC) FILETIME=[2CB8E170:01C5EAF8] X-Archives-Salt: d94db8cd-8eb1-4765-9f2e-9756340932dd X-Archives-Hash: 0bc449975ecd4a6fa5b39140daf868c7 --nextPart5443514.Nl5R8Ek8FW Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 16 November 2005 02:50 pm, Derek Tracy wrote: > That is what I was=A0 thinking when I switched to stable.....=A0 From wha= t I am > seeing either my computer doesn't like stable code or stable does not mean > stable anymore. But thats not what you said. I Quote:=20 "In the past I have always leaned toward ~x86 (I love bleeding edge).=A0 Bu= t=20 since this was going to be a new install I decided to do the preferred meth= od=20 and set all ~x86 flags via /etc/portage/package.keywords for specific=20 packages. "=20 This means your MIXING the two and is only recommended once the system is u= p.=20 During an install, you should do one or the other, not start mixing and=20 matching. HOWEVER, if you did set all to x86, and havent touched=20 package.keyword, read the next paragraph. Stable is fine.. I really dont understand how some modules have ANY thing t= o=20 do with being x86 or ~x86.. Modules are always finicky, no matter what lin= ux=20 distro you use.. You probably are just forgetting to compile in the kernel= =20 options you had before, that you do not now have. (Guessing of course).=20 Sounds to me you just re-installed before making sure you had all your duck= s=20 in a row and blaming it on gentoo. I havent seen anything in your message=20 that I can say, gentoo did it, and you didnt do it yourself.. It all really= =20 just sounds like configuration issues, that happens on all new install, no= =20 matter the distro, x86/~x86, or otherwise. Jeff --nextPart5443514.Nl5R8Ek8FW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDe6nEoOk9EvUvEtgRAj49AKCs7WCbPv7npdPhcZ3GcTtXDI0rRwCfZXp4 MHwvX3ALyhZ5KqsZgd7/9XM= =aOQc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5443514.Nl5R8Ek8FW-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list