| 1 |
On Saturday 11 Apr 2015 15:34:10 Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 10:22:09 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote: |
| 3 |
> > And then portage did two things. |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > 1. It masked emul-linux -- A move that I support, it's time to see that |
| 6 |
> > go. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > 2. It sent out a profile that sets variable ABI_x86 with 32 bit enabled. |
| 9 |
> > ALARM: ABI_x86 should be set in exactly one place: |
| 10 |
> > /etc/portage/make.conf and nowhere else. But, nevertheless, ABI_x86 WAS |
| 11 |
> > set which broke the profile because my system cannot compile 32 bit |
| 12 |
> > executables. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> That seems odd, I use several 64 bit profiles here and all of them have |
| 15 |
> ABI_X86="64" |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Same here, but I do not have it explicitly specified it in make.conf. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > Right now my system is completely unusable and will need fresh stage3 |
| 21 |
> > packages followed by an emerge emptytree to recover. But before I can do |
| 22 |
> > that, I need a sane profile |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Can't you just set ABI_X86="64 -32" in make.conf? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Is it even needed at all? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
If there are packages that require 32bit libs portage will ask for it, yes? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> > and to know that the person who pushed out |
| 32 |
> > the changes to portage, obviously without any testing whatsoever, that |
| 33 |
> > broke my system so comprehensively is tortured, executed, butchered, and |
| 34 |
> > then cremated. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> That's quite lenient, you could have left the execution until |
| 37 |
> last :) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Cremation will not leave a long lasting impression in dev circles, but first I |
| 40 |
suggest that you check the problem is not caused by something entirely |
| 41 |
different to the change in emul-linux. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Regards, |
| 45 |
Mick |
Archives