| 1 |
Kevin O'Gorman writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Kevin O'Gorman <kogorman@×××××.com> |
| 4 |
wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> > I thank you for the expert advice. I'm doing the emerge now, but even |
| 7 |
> > if it succeeds, I'm worried that the xorg-server will still own this |
| 8 |
> > file, since portageq seems to see that it does. This seems inherently |
| 9 |
> > wrong. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Well, it is indeed. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> > Sigh. I'm too far along to flinch now, so if this emerges, I'll |
| 14 |
> > probably restart X. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > Wish me luck. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I do, but I do not believe bad things might happen. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Hmm. Even with the FEATURES option from the suggestion, I get exactly |
| 21 |
> the same error message. I cut-and-pasted it, but I wonder if it's |
| 22 |
> spelled right? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
It is. But I forgot about the protect-owned feature. I thought -collision- |
| 25 |
protect would act stronger and imply it, but apparently it does not. So, |
| 26 |
'FEATURES=-protect-owned emerge ati-drivers' might have worked better. If |
| 27 |
not, 'FEATURES="-collision-protect -protect-owned" emerge ati-drivers' would |
| 28 |
have worked in any case. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> I'm going to try just deleting (well, renaming) the file, hoping that |
| 31 |
> this will work... |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Yes, that's okay. After all, the file is still there, it's just now being |
| 34 |
generated by the ati-driver. I wouldn't worry too much. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Wonko |
Archives