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 1QZts6-0004fa-Qd for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:03:43 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8332D1C094; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457061C094 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:00:15 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AowIAGjSA05Ld+Fz/2dsb2JhbABSmFKOW3iIc8JIhi0ElmWHEIQn X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,416,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="117037474" Received: from 75-119-225-115.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO waltdnes.org) ([75.119.225.115]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with SMTP; 23 Jun 2011 20:00:13 -0400 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:01:30 -0400 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:01:30 -0400 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do we have to build gcc with fortran now? Message-ID: <20110624000130.GB18036@waltdnes.org> References: <4E0167C4.9080100@gmail.com> <4E01CF99.1070109@gmail.com> <20110622141242.7453a8e3@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> <4E01EDAF.60608@gmail.com> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 391425343e22086a871455421a40e2a8 On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 07:13:46AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote > No non-matching entries in /etc/portage/package.keywords. > No non-matching entries in /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords. > No non-matching entries in /etc/portage/package.mask. > No non-matching entries in /etc/portage/package.unmask. > No non-matching or empty entries in /etc/portage/package.use. > No non-matching or empty entries in /etc/portage/package.env. > No non-matching or empty entries in /etc/portage/package.cflags. While we're at it... 1) what's the difference between "package.keywords" and "package.accept_keywords"? 2) what does "package.env" do? 3) does "package.cflags" specify package-specific cflags? What about cxxflags? -- Walter Dnes