| 1 |
On 8/31/2012 9:40 AM, Asfand Qazi wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I'm doing an update after a long time, and find that glibc is is being |
| 5 |
> compiled - is that right? How comes the change from the previous model |
| 6 |
> to use system libc? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Thanks |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
What arch is your prefix? I very much doubt that Gentoo prefix has |
| 11 |
changed this "policy" (I know if it's /officially/ policy -- I'd guess |
| 12 |
something more like a long-standing tradition based on years of bitter |
| 13 |
experience -- my understanding is that it's been tried several times but |
| 14 |
has always ended in disaster and, ultimately, reversion). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
But, I'm really the wrong person to say -- that's second-hand |
| 17 |
information I'm giving you, I'm sure those who dealt with that in the |
| 18 |
trenches could say more about it. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
More likely, what has happened is that it has somehow accidentally |
| 21 |
gotten unmasked in your ${EPREFIX}/etc/portage/ or by an overlay. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Also, just to be sure, I just synced my prefix-x86 tree and no glibc |
| 24 |
appears in @system. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-gmt |
Archives