| 1 |
On 15-05-2008 10:45:56 +0200, Markus Duft wrote: |
| 2 |
> Fabian, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> what about the openssh 5.0 mask? Could you check that again, please? |
| 5 |
> It even compiles on interix ;) so shouldn't be too much of a problem. |
| 6 |
> Also I get the impression that it's not much different from v4.7, |
| 7 |
> since nearly all patches/hunks applied unmodified. Which symbols where |
| 8 |
> undefined when you tried? What USE flags did you use? Maybe it |
| 9 |
> compiles here because I'm missing something you had set. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
It massively breaks on Darwin. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> I'd really like to have that on unmasked at least on interix. That |
| 14 |
> would give us a large advance over interopsystems, which refuse to |
| 15 |
> make their patches for 4.6 open. There would be no more reason to use |
| 16 |
> their openssh binary package on interix. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Well, if you test on Linux, Solaris, AIX and HPUX, feel free to unmask |
| 19 |
and move the mask to the darwin/macos level. If Linux and/or Solaris |
| 20 |
don't work with it, I feel we should keep it globally masked. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 25 |
Gentoo on a different level |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives