| 1 |
Am Samstag, 30. Januar 2010 schrieb Iain Buchanan: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 03:32 +0100, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Hi there, |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > a while ago, I emerged virtual/jdk, and prior to it sun-jdk |
| 6 |
> > in order to direct manually what the virtual shall pull in. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > But now, virtual/jdk wants to install dev-java/icedtea as well. |
| 9 |
> > [...] |
| 10 |
> > Even though I understand from the virtual’s ebuild |
| 11 |
> > that it needs one and only one of those. |
| 12 |
> > [...] |
| 13 |
> > Am I getting something wrong here? Why is it pulling in icedtea? |
| 14 |
> > I’m on x86 BTW. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> [...] |
| 17 |
> However I remember that sun-jdk requires a license acceptance which has |
| 18 |
> changed recently, so maybe sun-jdk is now masked on your system, hence |
| 19 |
> the need for something else. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> What is the complete emerge output? Look for any masked or license |
| 22 |
> restricted packages. I added this to /etc/portage/package.license: |
| 23 |
> dev-java/sun-jdk dlj-1.1 |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Indeed there's an output concerning a lincence. I ignored it because in the |
| 26 |
past I had loads of messages there about masked or missing ebuilds due to the |
| 27 |
phasing-out of KDE3, which I still run. In that case though I would have |
| 28 |
expected portage wanting to remove sun-jdk because of a licence issue. Oh |
| 29 |
well, guess that's solved then. :-) |
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Gruß | Greetings | Qapla' |
| 32 |
Killing for peace is like fucking for virginity. |
Archives