| 1 |
Cool, thanks... totally thought it was "USE="... duh. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
So, I can get portage to upgrade Cocoon to 2.1, but now the question is |
| 4 |
should I? Why is it masked? I looked at the changelog on |
| 5 |
gentoo-portage.com but there ain't much there. Any cocoon users out there? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Ben |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Jeff Smelser wrote: |
| 10 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 11 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> On Sunday 04 April 2004 04:31 pm, Ben Munat wrote: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
>>Anyone know why Cocoon 2.1 is still masked on x86? It's been out for |
| 16 |
>>almost a year now, right? Anyone running it on a production server? |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>>For that matter, I can't even seem to get portage to install 2.1.4 even |
| 19 |
>>as a masked build. Here's what I typed: |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>>USE="~x86" emerge -p cocoon |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>>and it get: |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>>[ebuild R ] net-www/cocoon-2.0.2 |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>>I tried doing: |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>>USE="~x86" emerge -p >cocoon-2.0 |
| 30 |
>> |
| 31 |
>>but it doesn't find anything. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> try ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -a cacoon |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> - -- |
| 37 |
> Drink up, Socrates, it's all natural. |
| 38 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 39 |
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> iD8DBQFAcH88ld4MRA3gEwYRAlVtAKDViEwU2PEvDdxYX90BnS7h3rTX2gCeKCuv |
| 42 |
> uc/4oC3Ww2fLjBh57YxCuLE= |
| 43 |
> =fuqw |
| 44 |
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 45 |
> |
Archives