2007/8/8, B. Nice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Peter,
> I'm running a non-~amd64 box as well. My package.keywords file is
> getting rather large, but it's still a "stable" system. I'd have to
> guess that it is something with the new kernel, as I'm running
> x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-100.14.09 under the 2.6.20-gentoo-r8 kernel
> and not having problems with the sandbox violations. Granted this may
> be a faulty supposition as some of the major "unstable" packages I'm
> running is gcc-4.2.0 and glibc-2.6.
>
> I am curious why you had to turn sandbox off for
> nvidia-drivers. I've
> never had to. If memory serves, the last time I had trouble with the
> sandbox was firefox-1.5.xx.
i don't really why you have to do this. for what i know the sandbox
violation come when some package tries to use the root in a strange way.
this may be due to some ebuild bug. anyway i didn't experienced many
problems of sandbox violation, but when i did, putting feature -sandbox when
compiling it has given me no problem.
Ain't Gentoo fun. Two systems running the same things and two
> different experiences. I love it.
>
>
> On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 08:51 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > On Tuesday 07 August 2007 20:06, Beso wrote:
> > > have you switched to the no-multilib profile by chance?!
> >
> > If I'd tried anything of that magnitude I'd not have been puzzled by
> such a
> > small consequence as this.
> >
> > > or do you have an nvidia package?!
> >
> > Yes, I have nvidia-drivers. It's one of the packages that need sandbox
> > switched off. How does that help?
> >
> > > try adding "-sandbox" to your features in the make.conf and see if it
> > > works.
> >
> > Of course I tried that, and it did. Actually, I said "FEATURES=-sandbox
> > emerge --resume", and the emerge finished properly.
> >
> > The problem seems to be in switching to this new kernel version.
> >
> > --
> > Rgds
> > Peter.
> > Linux Counter 5290, Aug 93
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
>
>
--
dott. ing. beso
