| 1 |
Mike Frysinger posted <200410181023.55410.vapier@g.o>, excerpted |
| 2 |
below, on Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:23:55 -0400: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sunday 17 October 2004 04:41 pm, Collins Richey wrote: |
| 5 |
>> Is this a safe practice for nptl users, or will this break something |
| 6 |
>> else because the linuxthreads code is omitted? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> considering USE=nptl has been omitting linuxthreads support thus far on |
| 9 |
> your machine, nothing should break |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
That's what I thought here, on AMD64, compiled from original install with |
| 12 |
kernel 2.6/nptl, but I tried compiling it w/ nptlonly, and it broke a |
| 13 |
number of apps, including ls! I had a time backing out, too, but IIRC I |
| 14 |
was able to do so by manually extracting an older binary glibc package |
| 15 |
over top of the existing system, since emerge functionality was pretty |
| 16 |
much broken. Luckily bz2 and tar continued to work, as did mc, a bit |
| 17 |
surprisingly given its dependencies in comparison to ls. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Anyway, I /etc/package.masked that for now and remain back on |
| 20 |
glibc-2.3.4.20040808-r1. I noticed another one come up that I hadn't |
| 21 |
tried, but as they tend to come and go rather fast, I decided to wait and |
| 22 |
see, before attempting a 200410xx emerge again real soon. I have |
| 23 |
tomorrow off work unless they call me in, so maybe I'll remove my mask |
| 24 |
and see what's available, then, when I have the extra time to recover if |
| 25 |
it dies on me again. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 29 |
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little |
| 30 |
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- |
| 31 |
Benjamin Franklin |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives