Hi again, once more.. :D<br><br>Thank you for everyone.<br><br>problem was incorrect file permissions on /etc/portage/package.* files.<br><br>Now, i'm able to emerge gcc4.0.2 solely plaing with those files.. :) (works has planed by the gentoo comunity).
<br><br>MERRY XMAS to ALL<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 12/23/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Miguel Filipe</b> <<a href="mailto:miguel.filipe@...">miguel.filipe@...</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi all,<br><br>Thanks for the reply!<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 12/23/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Simon Stelling</b> <<a href="mailto:blubb@g.o" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
blubb@g.o</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi,<br><br>Miguel Filipe wrote:<br>> I've been trying to emerge gcc 4.0.2-r2, messing with<br>> /etc/portage/package.unmask & /etc/portage/package.keywords<br>> without success..<br>><br>> the portage man page says that if a package has -* is know to be broken
<br>> on all arches otherwise mentioned.<br>> So is 4.0.1, 4.0.0, 4.1-snapshot..<br>><br>> I would expect it to be at least marked unstable "~amd64 .."<br><br>I hope you really know what you are doing (or trying to do).
gcc-4.0 isn't<br>broken, but it is hard-masked because there are *major* changes, meaning you<br>should rebuild your whole system with it once you upgraded. That's why it is not<br>yet ~amd64 and we want to give it a long testing period. Another issue is that
<br>gcc-4.0 is even stricter than 3.4, meaning lots of packages won't build anymore.<br>That's why we marked it -*, because we don't want to disappoint normal users who<br>aren't familiar with writing patches. And those who are, are clever enough to
<br>unmask a hard masked package, it's not that hard after all.</blockquote><div><br><br>My situation is the following:<br>- I'm aware of the diferences.<br>- I'm used to recurring to gcc-config for switching between compiler versions.
<br>- I'm a software developer and _need_ gcc4 for development & testing my project's code (I for one, need to have gcc4 to make shure my code is gcc4 compatible :) )<br>- I'm aware of /etc/portage/package.* files, and respective man pages :)
<br>- The machine is a testing machine, has to be kind of stable, but I allready hand pick a couple of ~amd64 (cmucl, sbcl, java, gcc ..some others).<br><br>My main gripe is that I simply cannot install gcc4.0.2-r2.., here's what I tried...:
<br>----<br>miguel@feynman ~ $ sudo fgrep gcc /etc/portage/package.*<br>/etc/portage/package.keywords:# gcc4<br>/etc/portage/package.keywords:sys-devel/gcc -*<br>/etc/portage/package.unmask:=sys-devel/gcc-4.0.2-r2<br>miguel@feynman
~ $ sudo fgrep KEYWORDS /usr/portage/sys-devel/gcc/gcc-4.0.2-r2.ebuild <br>KEYWORDS="-*"<br>miguel@feynman ~ $ emerge gcc -pv<br><br>These are the packages that I would merge, in order:<br><br>Calculating dependencies ...done!
<br>[ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.4-r1 (-altivec) -bootstrap -boundschecking* -build +fortran -gcj +gtk -hardened -ip28 -mudflap (-multilib) -multislot (-n32) (-n64) +nls -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -objc-gc -vanilla 46 kB
<br><br>Total size of downloads: 46 kB<br>miguel@feynman ~ $ ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="-*" emerge =sys-devel/gcc-4.0.2-r2 -pv<br><br>These are the packages that I would merge, in order:<br><br>Calculating dependencies
<br>!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "=sys-devel/gcc-4.0.2-r2" have been masked.<br>!!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:<br>- sys-devel/gcc-4.0.2-r2 (masked by: -* keyword)
<br><br>For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man page or <br>refer to the Gentoo Handbook.<br><br>miguel@feynman ~ $ emerge =sys-devel/gcc-4.0.2-r2 -pv<br><br>These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
<br><br>Calculating dependencies <br>!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "=sys-devel/gcc-4.0.2-r2" have been masked.<br>!!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:<br>- sys-devel/gcc-
4.0.2-r2 (masked by: -* keyword)<br><br>For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man page or <br>refer to the Gentoo Handbook.<br>---<br><br>Conclusion: cannot selectively (force) install gcc4.0.2<br>
<br>Solution: editing the ebuild, and adding a "~amd64", but I guess that the porpuse /etc/portage/package.* infrastructure is to avoid that.<br> I also think that I had ocasions where editing the ebuild would prevent form emerging that same ebuild (some kind of ebuild tampering prevention).
<br><br><br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> gentoo seems to have major problems in keeping up with the public
<br>> releases.. its starting to look like debian stable....<br><br>Is this a 'i want to help'?</blockquote><div><br><br>I have contributed in the early start (before 1.0), and after that with bug squashing, but nothing impressive (quality or quantity wise). But simply, I don-t have time to nurse my install.. I wan't it to work.. that why I'm following amd64 stable + very few cherry picked ~amd64.
<br><br><br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> also.. I don't see the point in having 3 types of tags: stable,
<br>
> unstable, broken.. maybe the same point of (stable, testing, unstable..<br>> ala debian)<br><br>You're mixing up quite unrelated things. -* is generally used for packages that<br>are only available for one or two arch (typical example: binary packages). When
<br>it means 'broken', then it is only in the tree because it makes it easier for<br>devs to share ebuilds which they (and of course the 'advanced' users) can test.</blockquote><div><br><br>Okay, that makes sense.<br> </div>
<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">> Nevermind, basically, I'm using gentoo since 1.0rc6 and starting to be<br>> disapointed by the slowness of having fresh software available..
<br><br>If you feel more adventurous, use package.(unmask|keywords). It's a wonderful<br>tool to let the user decide himself what is stable enough for him.</blockquote><div><br><br>doing that allready.<br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> gnome 2.12 came out 7 of september, maybe when gnome 2.14 is out I can<br>> find it keyworded "amd64"..<br><br>Again, package.keywords if you agree. Since 1.0rc6, Gentoo has changed a lot.<br>We've got a huge user base, and we really don't feel like getting the same bug
<br>reported 10 times just because we marked some untested piece of software stable.<br>It won't make most users very happy either, especially those who want a system<br>that 'just works'.<br><br>> In conclusion, package mantainance needs a new organizational way to scale..
<br>> Or should I simply move to ~amd64, just like any debian user sets its<br>> system to testing without thinking twice, just after the install.<br><br>Moving to ~amd64 could be the right thing for you. But if you're running ~amd64
<br>and get tons of bugs, don't bitch. Personally, I think everybody who runs ~amd64<br>should be filing bugs whenever he hits one. If you don't want to do that, keep<br>your system stable.<br><br>Regards,<br><br>--<br>Simon Stelling
<br>Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead<br><a href="mailto:blubb@g.o" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">blubb@g.o</a><br>--<br><a href="mailto:gentoo-amd64@g.o" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">
gentoo-amd64@g.o</a> mailing list<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all">
<br>-- <br>Miguel Sousa Filipe
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Miguel Sousa Filipe
|
