| 1 |
Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> Do you have any references on this, please? I'm obviously using |
| 3 |
> different search terms from you, because I can't find anything about |
| 4 |
> this bug on Google. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
search term: |
| 7 |
bug "lspci -F" "0000:" |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
... brings us to: |
| 10 |
http://www.google.ch/search?q=bug+%22lspci+-F%22+%220000%3A%22+ |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
... where hit number 3 leads us to: |
| 13 |
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/p/pciutils/pciutils_2.1.11-15.1/changelog |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
... which says: |
| 16 |
* fix lspci -F for new or old lspci -x format (closes: #261536) |
| 17 |
based on patch by Ben Pfaff |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
... where #261536 is a link to: |
| 20 |
http://bugs.debian.org/261536 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> I've just run esync & am only offered the same version of pciutils that |
| 23 |
> I already have - 2.1.11-r5. If you can provide a link to the pciutils |
| 24 |
> bug then I'll request a version bump with b.g.o. (I'd also like to know |
| 25 |
> more about this so I can advise my customers, should I request a `lspci |
| 26 |
> -x` output from them). |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
The newest release is still masked by keyword. To unmask: |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
# mkdir -p /etc/portage |
| 31 |
# echo sys-apps/pciutils ~x86 >> /etc/portage/package.keywords |
| 32 |
# emerge -avt sys-apps/pciutils |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Christoph |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
echo mailto: NOSPAM !#$.'<*>'|sed 's. ..'|tr "<*> !#:2" org@fr33z3 |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives