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 1MDKTx-0004Ps-VT for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 15:40:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 383D4E0053; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 15:40:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f213.google.com (mail-ew0-f213.google.com [209.85.219.213]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3B3E0053 for ; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 15:40:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy9 with SMTP id 9so3249254ewy.34 for ; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 08:40:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=ff7XqBOosgkU8ggPGBLQptDDhvvL5q1KXIRGKpOGvEo=; b=OXCPLDzVhfMtGWT8qu9AojF0Iyqn/glvSF5nqabFevO2POrr3fLQqF0rekrI7Irj3u GjFE29mO1ggP9HquapmF9yJAwec0C5Uolzhi3jpCSvN+n6+8VEp5wDgrM7cN6+IisFXh /VeTXrvAgibUofPHkcgLUlgF5N9SgtgzUG+WM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :message-id; b=TvjFiXOj61miB32l1UkhBBtKZXmHeZuDyMLve0NapTPm1duKAX0H45TPLcMfuffLpl UI70tO8Bi3fiJeIDadvNpnNCpvxVMT6BLrZfB/U5kQMt7Sav9RaqDAPLI+OagIJGo+HY FH98z79p2QJXAmNlaym6zTpIad7TjgbPw6tFQ= Received: by 10.216.54.83 with SMTP id h61mr2004815wec.69.1244389223310; Sun, 07 Jun 2009 08:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet (196-210-153-123-rrdg-esr-2.dynamic.isadsl.co.za [196.210.153.123]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g11sm888234gve.1.2009.06.07.08.40.22 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 07 Jun 2009 08:40:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ... Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 17:38:52 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.4 (Linux/2.6.29-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.2.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <1244289806.15834.22.camel@rattus> <200906071702.47892.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: 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 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200906071738.52416.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: c32599a0-372b-4ee9-8942-c05191d76cef X-Archives-Hash: a6286e6f3332da90798bf3255d387a4b On Sunday 07 June 2009 17:21:20 walt wrote: > Alan McKinnon wrote: > > ... > > I'm also not sure anymore about which portage version was first to > > support sets. What I did was blow my top at the forced downgrade of > > portage at Zac's whim, and unmasked portage. Lots of troubles immediately > > and at once went away when I did this... > > Maybe that's why I remember using @preserved-rebuild once or maybe twice. > I'm running the same portage now on x86, ~x86, and ~amd64, i.e. 2.1.6.13, > which apparently doesn't know about sets. portage-2.2_rc33 is masked on > my profiles. The only reason it's masked is to force as many users as possible to use an earlier version so that it "can receive more testing and get better bug reports", and that was done by Zac himself. There is not a single technical or code quality reason for it to be masked, it's purely a human issue Just unmask portage and be done with it, I can't recall the last time there was a valid problem with latest portage reported here so it must have been a very long time ago. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com