| 1 |
I did not have to do anything other than create the directories and |
| 2 |
file. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 08:48, Andrew Cowie wrote: |
| 7 |
> On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 22:37, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 8 |
> > How exactly are you adding the applications to |
| 9 |
> > /etc/portage/profiles/package.mask? I found that adding |
| 10 |
> > >=net-www/apache-2.0.0 worked perfectly to keep apache at 1.x |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> That is exactly what I have in /etc/portage/profiles/package.mask, and |
| 13 |
> yet emerge still wants to bring in 2.0.47 . If I make that change to the |
| 14 |
> package.mask in /usr/portage/profiles, it behaves. [Until the next |
| 15 |
> emerge rsync, of course] |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> It's almost as if portage is ignoring that directory. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Is there a change to some central config file (make.conf? make.globals?) |
| 20 |
> That I may somehow have missed? Some new environment / make variable? |
| 21 |
> The rest of my tree seems up to date (I did an emerge world not too long |
| 22 |
> ago) |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> AfC |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> -- |
| 27 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives