| 1 |
On Tuesday 05 February 2008, Derek Fedel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ah, silly me. I should've figured it was something along those lines, |
| 3 |
> but I had read mention of catalyst not forcing setarch anymore in the |
| 4 |
> ChangeLog and got confused, I guess. Thanks, and sorry for the now |
| 5 |
> seemingly inane question. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
please fix your quoting ... top posting is the devil |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> On Feb 5, 2008 8:16 AM, Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@g.o> wrote: |
| 10 |
> > Derek Fedel wrote: |
| 11 |
> > > I know! I know! 2.0.5 isn't supposed to have this problem. Let me |
| 12 |
> > > explain, I've got a brand new install of 2007.0, a fresh copy of |
| 13 |
> > > portage, and this as my spec file: |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > How many times do we have to say this? :P |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > If you're going to build your own CD, you also need to build your own set |
| 18 |
> > of stages with the same snapshot. This is the *only* way to completely |
| 19 |
> > avoid the various upgrade blockers that occur in the tree. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
is there a catalyst/stages FAQ ? if not, there should be ... |
| 22 |
-mike |
Archives