| 1 |
On 04/02/18 01:34, Helmut Jarausch wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 02/03/2018 04:11:33 PM, Marc Joliet wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Am Samstag, 3. Februar 2018, 10:50:53 CET schrieb Helmut Jarausch: |
| 4 |
>> > On 02/03/2018 06:54:06 AM, Dale wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > > While on this topic, I have a question about glibc. I have it set in |
| 6 |
>> > > make.conf to save the binary packages. Generally I use it when I |
| 7 |
>> need |
| 8 |
>> > > to go back shortly after a upgrade, usually Firefox or something. |
| 9 |
>> > > However, this package is different since going back a version isn't a |
| 10 |
>> > > good idea. My question tho, what if one does go back a version using |
| 11 |
>> > > those saved binary packages? Has anyone ever did it and it work or |
| 12 |
>> > > did |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
1. do another backup |
| 15 |
2. take your last good binary package and unpack it in the root |
| 16 |
directory - it is an "image" of that package as it sits in the file system. |
| 17 |
3. rebuild that version of glibc by overiding emerge - comment out "die |
| 18 |
"aborting to save your system" in /usr/portage/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I have done this a couple of times with gcc (when manual deletes have |
| 21 |
gone rogue) but it should work with glibc as you have not recompiled any |
| 22 |
new packages. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
BillK |
Archives