| 1 |
Zac Medico posted on Sun, 09 Sep 2012 18:34:09 -0700 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 09/09/2012 05:59 PM, Duncan wrote: |
| 4 |
>> To your knowlege (IOW have you tested) having /etc/make.conf either a |
| 5 |
>> symlink to /etc/portage/make.conf or a simple one-line "source |
| 6 |
>> /etc/portage/make.conf"? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I've tested them both just now, and they work for me. Why wouldn't they? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Back then, portage complained. It's been awhile ago and I didn't write |
| 11 |
it down, but I seem to remember something about double inclusion. |
| 12 |
However, it's quite possible that was my diagnosis, not portage's |
| 13 |
complaint. I just returned to /etc/make.conf, because with both that |
| 14 |
and /etc/portage/make.conf portage had problems, and with /etc/portage/ |
| 15 |
make.conf only, something else didn't work. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
But as I said that was way back when I first read about it, probably in |
| 18 |
the changelog on my first update after it hit a release, so I'd guess |
| 19 |
it's looonngg fixed by now. Now that you've confirmed it works for you |
| 20 |
now, I'll play around with things a bit and file bugs if I see 'em. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
As always, thanks. =:^) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
(Now back to that kernel 3.6-git bug I just finished bisecting and was |
| 25 |
about to file upstream... workqueue merge, commit 63d95a91, crashing in |
| 26 |
schedule/core.c on line 1654, FWIW.) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 30 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 31 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives