Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Stroller <root@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: vapier@g.o, gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] boostrap.sh problem?
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 02:02:58
Message-Id: BB367C6A.17F2C%root@stellar.eclipse.co.uk
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] boostrap.sh problem? by Mike Frysinger
1 On 12/7/03 11:53 pm, "Mike Frysinger" <vapier@g.o> wrote:
2
3 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
4 > Hash: SHA1
5 >
6 > On Saturday 12 July 2003 15:22, Daniel Robbins wrote:
7 >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 12:37:52PM -0400, Grant Goodyear wrote:
8 >>> I asked hunt3r to try bootstrapping again w/o "static" in USE, and so
9 >>> far it seems to be working for him. Should bootstrap be filtering that
10 >>> use flag?
11 >>
12 >> Bootstrap doesn't filter out any use flags. They need to be set correctly.
13 >
14 > you cant sit there and say that and then not tell people what will break a
15 > bootstrap ... either the bootstrap process should filter static from USE or
16 > the install docs should be updated with a note that says 'USE=static' will
17 > break bootstrap, please do not use this until you are past stage3
18
19 Erm... I'm not sure if this is a dumb-question... but I thought that
20 bootstrap should use only the USE settings in
21 /usr/portage/profiles/build/make.defaults ?
22
23 $grep USE make.defaults
24 USE="build"
25
26 I note that sys-apps/sed is listed in /usr/portage/profiles/build/packages
27
28 Is it possible that hunt3r has found some clever undocumented way to
29 manipulate his USE flags too early in his installation..?
30
31 Stroller.
32
33
34 --
35 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list