| 1 |
2009/1/16 Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Alejandro wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > 2009/1/15 Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk <mailto:neil@××××××××××.uk>> |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:00:07 +0100, Geralt wrote: |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > > > You don't need to remove anything, just let portage handle the |
| 11 |
> > block |
| 12 |
> > > > for you. Blocks marked with a b (instead of a B) can be handled |
| 13 |
> by |
| 14 |
> > > > recent portage releases. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > > are you sure that his works in this case? This blocking bug was |
| 17 |
> some |
| 18 |
> > > time before the new Portage went stable and back then you had to |
| 19 |
> > > resolve it by hand. |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > That's right, but now the new portage is stable so it is handled on |
| 22 |
> > stable systems. The block was handled automatically when it first |
| 23 |
> > appeared |
| 24 |
> > on ~arch systems. |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> > |
| 27 |
> > -- |
| 28 |
> > Neil Bothwick |
| 29 |
> > |
| 30 |
> > Is it true that cannibals don't eat clowns because they taste funny? |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > |
| 33 |
> > Which version of portage do this? I am on amd64 stable and have the |
| 34 |
> > problem a couple of week ago, and i don/t remember any portage update,,, |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> I know portage-2.2_rc20 works well. I have not had any trouble on mine |
| 37 |
> and you may want to give it a shot. It is still keyworded I think but |
| 38 |
> it does handle the blocks very well. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Your choice on whether to install or not. |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> Dale |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> :-) :-) |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> Thanks for th einfo! I will give a try... |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Cheers! |
Archives