Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Bouncing messages

[Peter Humphrey]

On Saturday, 14 January 2023 07:00:29 GMT Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2023-01-13, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Hello list,
> > 
> > Ever since the new year I've been getting a bounce message from this list
> > - 19 of them so far. The first of those listed one message twice, most of
> > the others six times. The message was 200359.
> > 
> > I don't know what that message was, but why is the system Out There 
having
> > such a hard time with it?
> 
> Was the message from the list software or from a Microsoft system?

I don't know - I haven't received it as far as I know. The only archive 
entries I've found are of this conversation.

> There's possibly one subscriber that has configured their
> Exchange/Outlook account to forward e-mails to a Gmail account, and
> forwarding as implemented by Microsoft apparently isn't done correctly
> and so "SPF" checks run by Gmail are failing.

Hmm. Would that cause the message to me to fail, in particular?

> I tried to send a message to this list about this topic back in November
> but it never made through, perhaps it was filtered because it quoted
> some of the error messages.


-- 
Regards,
Peter.

[gentoo-user] Remove NetworkManager without breaking cinnamon ?

[mehdi chemloul]

Hi, (i'm a endUser) i try to remove NetworkManager but it's seems to 
have somes dependencies with cinnamon-control-center ? It's possible 
without break cinnamon or worst ...?


Cheers.

Rumpelstilschien

Re: [gentoo-user] Glibc and binpackages

[John Blinka]

On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:54 PM Laurence Perkins 
wrote:

> I’m not sure if I’m doing something horribly wrong, or missing something
> blindingly obvious, but I’ve just had to boot a rescue shell yet again, so
> I’m going to ask.
>
>
>
> To save time and effort, I have my big, powerful machine create
> binpackages for everything when it updates, and then let all my smaller
> machines pull from that.  It works pretty well for the most part.
>

I do something quite similar, but have never had a glibc problem. Maybe the
problem lies in differences between the specific details of our two
approaches.

I have 3 boxes with different hardware but identical portage setup,
identical world file, identical o.s., etc, even identical CFLAGS, CPPFLAGS
and CPU_FLAGS_X86 despite different processors. Like you, I build on my
fastest box (but offload work via distcc), and save binpkgs. After a world
update (emerge -DuNv —changed-deps @world) , I rsync all repositories and
binpkgs from the fast box to the others. An emerge -DuNv —changed-deps
—usepkgonly @world on the other boxes completes the update. I do this
anywhere from daily to (rarely) weekly. Portage determines when to update
glibc relative to other packages. There hasn’t been a problem in years with
glibc.

I believe there are more sophisticated ways to supply updated portage trees
and binary packages across a local network.  I think there are others on
the list using these more sophisticated techniques successfully. Just a
plain rsync satisfies my needs.

It’s not clear to me whether you have the problem on  your big powerful
machine or on your other machines. If it’s the other machines, that
suggests that portage knows the proper build sequence on the big machine
and somehow doesn’t on the lesser machines. Why? What’s different?

Perhaps there’s something in my update frequency or maintaining an
identical setup on all my machines that avoids the problem you’re having?

If installing glibc first works, then maybe put a wrapper around your
emerge? Something that installs glibc first if there’s a new binpkg then
goes on to the remaining updates.

Just offered in case there’s a useful hint from my experience - not arguing
that mine is the one true way (tm).

HTH,

John Blinka

>