Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Eric Andresen <ndiin1@×××.net>
To: MAL <mal@×××××××.com>
Cc: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:21:53
Message-Id: 1045764262.27123.1.camel@ndiin
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing by MAL
1 I was refering to lines 22 through 31 of gcc-config-1.3.1.ebuild (and
2 similar for other gcc-config ebuilds). My guess is the changing of the
3 way that portage handled things made this method no longer work.
4
5 On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 03:20, MAL wrote:
6 > Eric Andresen wrote:
7 > > On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 19:56, Terje Kvernes wrote:
8 > > I'm willing to bet that the problem is caused by that particular
9 > > ebuild's changing of the PATH. Just a thought. ;)
10 >
11 > I don't see how.. I have a few (>3) 1.4 systems that went through the
12 > upgrade fine, and looking at them, I can't see any difference in the
13 > PATH settings, between them and my updated-1.2 system.
14 >
15 > MAL
16 --
17 --Eric Andresen
18 ndiin@×××.edu
19
20
21 --
22 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 'gcc-config' issues Nick Jones <carpaski@××××××.net>