1 |
Sebastian Günther <samson@××××××××××××××××.de> writes: |
2 |
|
3 |
> * Harry Putnam (reader@×××××××.com) [12.06.09 16:41]: |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> There is a patch offered but still one would think using standard |
6 |
>> emerge on a package that is outside the `~' daredevil stage and is not |
7 |
>> masked, it should `just work' [tm]. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> |
10 |
> |
11 |
> When I read the bug rightfully, procmail did not build with glibc |
12 |
> 2.10.1, which is *not* stable yet, especially because of a lot packages |
13 |
> which don't build cleanly with it at the moment. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> So if you'd use the stable glibc it would build fine. There is no need |
16 |
> to mark procmail in any way. ~x86 should be able to apply patches on |
17 |
> their own, or wait until the patch arrives in tree. |
18 |
|
19 |
Having run ~x86 since starting to build this install... how big of a |
20 |
problem would it be to return to stable? |