| 1 |
On 06/18/2019 05:43:55 PM, John Covici wrote: |
| 2 |
> It would seem impossible for me to switch to profile 17.1. I say this |
| 3 |
> because I can never run emerge --depclean . I have a few packages |
| 4 |
> which will not compile and one not in the tree anymore. the packages |
| 5 |
> which will not compile are mono-4.4.1.0 and totem-3.30 -- I have filed |
| 6 |
> bugs against both of them. Inn no longer configures and I have |
| 7 |
> discussed this in another thread. So, where can I go with this? I |
| 8 |
> hate to just go forward, although these packages look they don't have |
| 9 |
> any lib32 dependencies. Wat do you thihnk about this? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I haven't run emerge --depclean. I have re-emerge gcc / glibc and all |
| 15 |
packages with |
| 16 |
files /usr/lib32 and /lib32 and some more which I don't remember. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
On the other hand I don't see such a big advantage of profile 17.1. |
| 19 |
I have several (64 bit) packages (in my local portage tree) which still |
| 20 |
install into /usr/lib |
| 21 |
although this folder is now the replacement of the old /usr/lib32. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
But I don't know if we sometimes forced to switch to a successor of |
| 24 |
17.1. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Helmut |
Archives