1 |
Mr Cramer, you replied in private email, but your blacklist bounced/dropped my |
2 |
consequent reply. Replying on-list: |
3 |
|
4 |
On Saturday 31 January 2009 18:07:02 you wrote: |
5 |
> But emerge tolds me: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> emerge -pv rasqual |
8 |
> |
9 |
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order: |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Calculating dependencies... done! |
12 |
> |
13 |
> emerge: there are no ebuilds to satisfy "rasqual". |
14 |
|
15 |
There is a typo: just drop the extra 'u'. It's just rasqal, like you used it |
16 |
correctly here below: |
17 |
|
18 |
> while qsearch says: |
19 |
> |
20 |
> qsearch rasqal |
21 |
> dev-libs/rasqal library that handles Resource Description Framework (RDF) |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Before I screw up my system: |
24 |
> Is there something more fundamental damaged? |
25 |
|
26 |
This is the spot where I think FEATURES="buildpkg" should be |
27 |
mentioned. It will help you roll back the old binaries should |
28 |
something bad happen. It is mentioned on the list regularly by many |
29 |
posters, most of them more experienced with it than I am. :) |
30 |
|
31 |
Still, I don't think upgrading rasqal should cause major havoc. Worst |
32 |
thing that happened to this box was that openoffice and soprano wanted |
33 |
to be re-emerged. So just some automated extra compiling, no big deal |
34 |
for me. YMMV |
35 |
|
36 |
> Or does rasqal only exists as unstable ebuild (reading your posting |
37 |
> I would tend to answer this with "NO" ... |
38 |
|
39 |
0.9.10 has been stable on Gentoo for nearly three years according to |
40 |
/usr/portage/dev-libs/rasqal/ChangeLog |
41 |
|
42 |
The newer versions have had some bugs reported, but they have been |
43 |
fixed. You can look them up in bugs.gentoo.org if you're worried. |
44 |
|
45 |
-- |
46 |
Arttu V. |