Gentoo Archives: gentoo-devhelp

From: Thomas Sachau <tommy@g.o>
To: gentoo-devhelp@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-devhelp] dodoc vs directories
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:57:05
Message-Id: 4F46A80B.10801@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-devhelp] dodoc vs directories by James Cloos
James Cloos schrieb:
>>>>>> "TS" == Thomas Sachau <tommy@g.o> writes: > > TS> I just tried libgit2 (dev-libs/libgit2-0.16.0) and it installs just fine > TS> for me, so i cannot reproduce this (base version for my portage is > TS> 2.2_alpha87), what are your versions of portage and libgit2? > > As I implied by saying master, -9999. libgit2 is also 0.16.0. > > I tried updating portage just before posting, the log says that was from > 9997bb9c81e07 to 4a85888920244. > > My last successful install of libgit2 was 0.15.0 back in October, so the > change which made portage start failing ebuilds which try to dodoc dirs > was done sometime in the last four months. > > TS> P.S.: No need to cc me, i am subscribed to this list. > > I'm used to lkml-style etiquette; include everyone who has posted in the > CC. It tends to be the norm on technical lists, and is what gnus does > by default if I reply to the copy sent directly. I (now) see that this > lists munges reply-to, so this reply honours that.... > > -JimC
Not much i can help with, since i cannot reproduce this myself. Maybe you ask portage maintainers on irc in #gentoo-portage or on the related mailing list about this. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature