| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Hi all, |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
first things first: I don't want to complain. Just a hint :°) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
My experience over the last two weeks is, that ebuild quality concerning build |
| 9 |
success on first try is far worse than back in October/November last year |
| 10 |
when I installed my first gentoo-system. |
| 11 |
So what's the (aka assumed) reason for this? Looks to me like there is a |
| 12 |
substantial difference between the several make-profiles. So I can imagine |
| 13 |
that not everything get's tested on any profile "scenario". This is where my |
| 14 |
question arises: what profile should I choose to get around those growing |
| 15 |
ebuild errors as good as one can? Is it recommended to switch to gcc3? What |
| 16 |
is Ur average test setting or developer base U test on? |
| 17 |
Besides: Yes - I do know it's simply my fault, when I rsync on a daily |
| 18 |
cronbase and _try to update_ the system. I could leave things as they are. |
| 19 |
BUT I want to have up-to-date core packages to reduce bug and security flaw |
| 20 |
"experiences". |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Thanks in advance - Andrew |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
- -- |
| 25 |
Andreas Waschbuesch, GAUniversity KG MA FNZ FK01 |
| 26 |
eMail: awaschb@××××.de |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Death is nature's way of saying `Howdy'. |
| 29 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 30 |
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
iD8DBQE81xD12s5UCjOaQbYRAhL3AKCr2ABbSdSEC9TjbOy9yiOG5SYF5ACfQPyr |
| 33 |
IBNMXDV4vj6aHNzoK/hB16w= |
| 34 |
=TmPN |
| 35 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives