| 1 |
Well, you can enable ACCEPT_KEYWORDS in /etc/make.conf and set it to |
| 2 |
~arch, where "arch" is your architecture (i.e. ~x86). This opens up a |
| 3 |
number of interesting packages. Then there is |
| 4 |
/usr/portage/profiles/package.mask. Any item in this file is literally |
| 5 |
banned from being installed, usually as a safety precaution. gcc-3.3 is |
| 6 |
a fairly new compiler release, and I believe some fo the AMD Hammer |
| 7 |
patches are still reported to break things, so it's masked in |
| 8 |
package.mask to protect even the people running ~arch. I currently use |
| 9 |
gcc-3.3 and glibc-2.3.2-r2 + nptl, and so far haven't had any issues. |
| 10 |
When these packages will be removed from package.mask is anyone's guess, |
| 11 |
but for now, every `emerge rsync', you'll have to manually edit that |
| 12 |
file. It's what I have to do. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
--Kumba |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Christian Aust wrote: |
| 18 |
> Hi all, |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I'm not sure if gentoo actually lacks this feature, but how can I |
| 21 |
> permanently accept ebuilds that are marked unstable, _without_ messing |
| 22 |
> with the original ebuild file and loosing my changes during the next |
| 23 |
> portage update? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Ie, I've emerged gcc-3.3 and like to give it a try on my Intel P4. But |
| 26 |
> "emerge -ep system" would downgrade it to 3.2.x first, instead of |
| 27 |
> leaving it alone. Also, I wouldn't like to accept all unstable packages |
| 28 |
> in make.conf; I figure it would be more difficult to tell what went |
| 29 |
> wrong wrong in case of an error if you have all unstable packages (and |
| 30 |
> not only gcc). |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Your feedback is appreciated. Best regards, |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> - Christian |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives