| 1 |
Leon Feng <rainofchaos@×××××.com> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
[...] |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
>> I'm running ~x86 on everything and latest version of gentoolkit (I |
| 6 |
>> don't have gentoolkit-dev installed) |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> I've emerged lafilefixer (thanks Steve) and ran |
| 9 |
>> lafilefixer --justfixit |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> Then ran revdep-rebuild again.... it still finds broken binutils so |
| 12 |
>> I'm letting it `oneshot' the emerge. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> Was the expectation that running `lafilefixer --justfixit' would stop |
| 15 |
>> revdep-rebuild from continuously finding a broken binutils? |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> Or was I expected to run lafilefixer --justfixit and then rebuild |
| 18 |
>> binutils once more? |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> In any case I did the later and now the oneshot has finished and a |
| 21 |
>> rerun of revdep-rebuild again finds the same `broken' binutils.... |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> Apparently no progress has occurred.. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> Same here. I am running ~x86 too. |
| 26 |
> lafilefixer --justfixit and reemerged glibc do no work. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> I will try out the patch in bug 298651 soon. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Leon, sorry to be a lamer here but I didn't understand the patch or |
| 31 |
even that there was an actual patch, after reading the long confusing |
| 32 |
exchange on that bug report. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Did you come away with a semi-easily done patch? If so can you |
| 35 |
explain a bit about how its applied or maybe direct me to the part |
| 36 |
that discusses an actual patch? |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
ps - have you see something detrimental happening if you just go ahead |
| 39 |
and run like it is? |
Archives