1 |
Don't forget to reply to the list... I say after I forgot to change the |
2 |
to address on the email I just sent. |
3 |
|
4 |
On Thu, 2021-04-22 at 16:37 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote: |
5 |
> Matt Connell (Gmail) wrote: |
6 |
> > On Thu, 2021-04-22 at 15:09 -0400, Alan Grimes wrote: |
7 |
> > > - sys-libs/glibc-2.32-r7::gentoo (masked by: package.mask) |
8 |
> > This is the current stable version of glibc, which would satisfy the |
9 |
> > ebuild. You have it masked manually, it would seem. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Did you leave yourself a comment as to why it was masked? |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Well, I got 2.33 installed on me and the system does not allow that |
14 |
> package to downgarde, for good reason... I masked the old version to |
15 |
> stop it from bitching at me that it can't downgrade that package. |
16 |
|
17 |
I don't for sure whether or not glibc is supposed to be able to be |
18 |
downgraded or not. If not, then it sounds like using the ~arch version |
19 |
of it is biting you in the backside. A cautionary tale about not using |
20 |
the ~arch keyword for mission-critical packages unless the situation is |
21 |
dire. |