| 1 |
On Dec 25, 2007 6:26 AM, <felix@×××××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2007 at 10:57:10PM -0800, Jason Dusek wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Dec 23, 2007 8:23 AM, <felix@×××××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Emerging haxml directly repeats the greedy performance... |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Does deleting the ebuild (not haxml, just that particular ebuild, as |
| 7 |
> > suggested by "manually remove the ebuild", make any difference? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I took "manually remove the ebuild" to mean do all the remove steps |
| 10 |
> myself, but I don't have any idea what those steps are. Do you think |
| 11 |
> it means the actual haxml-1.13.2.ebuild file? I'd be willing to try |
| 12 |
> that, but that is the most recent ebuild. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Maybe you're reading it right, but it's not clear -- if you are |
| 15 |
supposed to remove HaXML by hand, it should have said "manually |
| 16 |
remove the package". When you say "Emerging HaXML directly |
| 17 |
repeats the greedy performance...", do you mean *unmerging* |
| 18 |
HaXML is not doable? You could try unmerging it and then |
| 19 |
re-emerging it. If you've already tried that, though, then I'll |
| 20 |
have to think of something else :) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I'm using the same HaXML you are, actually. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
_jsn |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives