1 |
On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 20:23 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 26 May 2006 10:02:25 -0700, Lord Sauron wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > > you should try the ~x86 version of portage which has many |
5 |
> > > improvements: $ echo "sys-apps/portage ~x86" |
6 |
> > > >> /etc/portage/package.use $ emerge portage |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > Just a question, but there's got to be a reason why it's still in ~x86. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Yes, it's less than 30 days old. ~arch does not mean unstable, it means |
11 |
> still-in-testing. |
12 |
|
13 |
In fact, since portage is on a continuous update-and-improvement move, |
14 |
it will _always_ have a version in ~x86. I run completely ~x86, and |
15 |
even unmask some hard-masked packages (like gnome-2.14 used to be) |
16 |
manually, and I haven't had any major issues. The secret is to update |
17 |
regularly. If you run ~x86 and update monthly or less frequently, you |
18 |
run the risk of multiple problems snowballing on you. |
19 |
|
20 |
Nevertheless, if you have any reason to keep your system stable, |
21 |
standard disclaimer applies: stay away from ~x86. Just cause it works |
22 |
for me, doesn't mean it always will. |
23 |
|
24 |
cya, |
25 |
-- |
26 |
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au> |
27 |
|
28 |
Whip me. Beat me. Make me maintain AIX. |
29 |
-- Stephan Zielinski |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |