On Monday 09 May 2005 22:27, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 09 May 2005 04:12 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
What about adding a panic mode to portage which, when confronted
with a missing profile, (and after confirmation) continues to upgrade
portage to the latest version it can find with some
maillog: 10/05/2005-11:15:45(+0200): Paul de Vrieze types
On Monday 09 May 2005 22:27, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 09 May 2005 04:12 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
What about adding a panic mode to portage which, when confronted
with a missing profile, (and after confirmation) continues to
On Tuesday 03 May 2005 23:05, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 14:49 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 03 May 2005 12:10 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I think an easier solution would be a portage rescue set of profiles.
afaik the only thing it'd need is a
On Monday 09 May 2005 04:12 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
What about adding a panic mode to portage which, when confronted with a
missing profile, (and after confirmation) continues to upgrade portage to
the latest version it can find with some default settings that should
allways work.
looking
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 10:12:03PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
What about adding a panic mode to portage which, when confronted with a
missing profile, (and after confirmation) continues to upgrade portage to the
latest version it can find with some default settings that should allways
On Tuesday 03 May 2005 09:10, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I think an easier solution would be a portage rescue set of profiles.
These would be minimal profiles not designed for actual use, but only
for performing a portage update for those people that lag too far
behind. The idea would be a very
Stephen P. Becker posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below,
on Mon, 02 May 2005 12:33:24 -0400:
Removing old profiles will do nothing other than forcing them to set a new
profile. Changing the profile won't stop people from doing security only
updates.
Except that isn't quite correct, for
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 08:21 -0700, Duncan wrote:
Is there a convenient profile archive somewhere? If not, perhaps one
should be created, and at deletion from the tree, the profile dir in
question is replaced with a file (or the empty dir with only that
file) pointing to the archive. This
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 14:49 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 03 May 2005 12:10 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I think an easier solution would be a portage rescue set of profiles.
afaik the only thing it'd need is a 'make.defaults' and a custom
'packages' (where we'd force a newer
Stuart Longland posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Sun, 01 May 2005 20:35:56 +1000:
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
How long are all those non-cascaded profiles going to stick around? They
make profile changes a mess for anyone who wants to do something crazy
like change default USE flags
On Sun, 2005-05-01 at 05:31 -0700, Duncan wrote:
Stuart Longland posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Sun, 01 May 2005 20:35:56 +1000:
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
How long are all those non-cascaded profiles going to stick around? They
make profile changes a mess for anyone who
11 matches
Mail list logo
