| 1 |
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Tonko Mulder <tonko.mulder@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Op maandag 24-11-2008 om 06:00 uur [tijdzone -0800], schreef Mark |
| 3 |
> Knecht: |
| 4 |
>> On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@×××××.com> posted |
| 6 |
>> > 5bdc1c8b0811231435y2eea1b1by366c787c983c1089@××××××××××.com, excerpted |
| 7 |
>> > below, on Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:35:42 -0800: |
| 8 |
>> > |
| 9 |
>> >> The root cause of this is I wanted to emerge the newest version of |
| 10 |
>> >> Ardour from the pro-audio overlay and ran into a new message about it |
| 11 |
>> >> being masked by something called EAPI 2 which according to the message |
| 12 |
>> >> requires a 'newer' version of portage. (No revision given.) That's all |
| 13 |
>> >> this was about, and there's absoutely no rush to fix it as I'm not |
| 14 |
>> >> likely to really use Ardour. Just wanted to take a look at what sort of |
| 15 |
>> >> headway they are making with their feature set so it's really nothing |
| 16 |
>> >> but pure curiosity. |
| 17 |
>> > |
| 18 |
>> > OK. FWIW, for EAPI-2, you need the new ~arch portage-2.2-rcX series. |
| 19 |
>> > EAPI-2 is allowed in various overlays and now in ~arch, but not in stable |
| 20 |
>> > until a stable portage supports it. It'll bring a number of new features |
| 21 |
>> > including full set support, per-package use-defaults (previously a USE |
| 22 |
>> > flag could be defaulted to on per profile, but not per package, off being |
| 23 |
>> > the unset default, of course), and IIRC use dependencies (if a package |
| 24 |
>> > requires say C++ support and gcc has been built without it, it must now |
| 25 |
>> > die with an error message telling the user to make the change, with use- |
| 26 |
>> > deps, it could force gcc to be recompiled with C++ instead of dying, thus |
| 27 |
>> > avoiding somebody leaving a 200-package emerge going overnight, only to |
| 28 |
>> > come back the next day to find out it stopped with package #2 due to a |
| 29 |
>> > USE dependency death). |
| 30 |
>> > |
| 31 |
>> > So there are some nice things coming in EAPI-2 and a number of packages |
| 32 |
>> > can really use them. But an EAPI-2 supporting portage, while now in the |
| 33 |
>> > tree, remains unstable, as there are still a few bugs to work out before |
| 34 |
>> > it goes fully stable. So if you prefer a stable portage, you'll have to |
| 35 |
>> > wait for EAPI-2, and any packages requiring it (which by definition can't |
| 36 |
>> > be stabilized until an EAPI-2 portage is stable too). |
| 37 |
>> > |
| 38 |
>> > -- |
| 39 |
>> > Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 40 |
>> |
| 41 |
>> Thanks Duncan. I basically understand the portage stuff, in the sense |
| 42 |
>> that it's a new feature. I read a few eamils form the portage |
| 43 |
>> developers, etc., and got a sense of some of what it is supposed to |
| 44 |
>> do. that part I'm OK with, as I am, I guess, with the idea that |
| 45 |
>> someone who wrote the Ardour ebuild is requiring these new features. |
| 46 |
>> |
| 47 |
>> My real question is what is required to build that portage on an |
| 48 |
>> ~amd64 machine so that I can build Ardour? Is anyone on this list |
| 49 |
>> using portage-2.2.x? If so how did they get it to build? |
| 50 |
>> |
| 51 |
> I run sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc15 |
| 52 |
> But that just got installed with the updates. Not sure if there are |
| 53 |
> special requirements or not. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Thanks Tonko. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
Watch out for a portage downgrade if you haven't unmasked 2.2-rcX. |
| 58 |
Reading on the 32-bit list there are others who are getting downgraded |
| 59 |
due to developers wanting more testing on 2.1... |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
Cheers, |
| 62 |
Mark |
Archives