Gentoo Archives: gentoo-alt

From: Markus Duft <mduft@g.o>
To: gentoo-alt@l.g.o
Subject: RE: [gentoo-alt] FW: portage badly broken - is this a prefix issue?
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:02:15
Message-Id: 011c01c8ee2b$eee2bb20$cca83160$@org
In Reply to: [gentoo-alt] FW: portage badly broken - is this a prefix issue? by Markus Duft
1 >
2 > >
3 > > Hi
4 > >
5 > > Seems that portage (I have version Portage 2.2.00.11125-prefix) is
6 > > broken. Seems that since this version (or maybe a few versions
7 > > earlier), portage dooms the environment for fetching files. The
8 > > environment misses the proxy variables (http_proxy, ftp_proxy,
9 > > no_proxy), and thus portage cannot fetch anything from behind a
10 > > proxy... it seems that also the PATH variable isn't set up correctly,
11 > > since portage misses the wget from it's prefix, and instead uses
12 > > another one (cannot tell which one though...)
13 >
14 > Forget about the last one (not using prefix wget)... it was my own
15 > stupidity
16 > that caught me :) *_proxy are still unset however, and I cannot
17 > fetch...
18
19 BTW. Did you have time to look into the issues with installing binpkgs? IIRC
20 I got a message stating something about EPREFIX nor found in some dict or
21 so...
22
23 Cheers, Markus
24
25 >
26 > >
27 > > Any ideas?
28 > >
29 > > Cheers, Markus
30 >

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-alt] FW: portage badly broken - is this a prefix issue? Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>