Paul de Vrieze wrote:
I think you know what I mean. By definition portage is allready there for
the ebuild to be evaluated. It is therefore unnecessary to specify it as
a dependency.
Sure I understood that. However, your post said exactly the opposite:
"... building does not depend on portage
On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 10:34 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 June 2005 09:45 am, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 17:48 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 14 June 2005 05:32 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > > > I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage
On Wednesday 15 June 2005 09:45 am, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 17:48 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Tuesday 14 June 2005 05:32 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > > I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it
> > > actually use portage services. In any c
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 17:48 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 June 2005 05:32 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it
> > actually use portage services. In any case it should be an RDEPEND, as
> > building does not depend on port
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 22:50 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Monday 13 June 2005 19:18, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > The bug hit me while working with GLI last night, and now I really do
> > need a solution for it. Looking at the dep tree to see why perl pulls
> > in openssl, the critical parts of
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 06:51 pm, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i assume you didnt read the reply i made already ...
>
> gcc-config DEPEND-ed on a specific version of portage (the first one to
> provide portageq to userspace)
I have to chuckle wryly - when the bug for this was first opened, perl
DEPEND
On Wednesday 15 June 2005 00:52, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:32:06 +0200
>
> Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it
> > actually use portage services. In any case it should be an RDEPEND,
> > as building do
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 06:52 pm, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:32:06 +0200
>
> Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it
> > actually use portage services. In any case it should be an RDEPEND,
> > as building d
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:32:06 +0200
Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it
> actually use portage services. In any case it should be an RDEPEND,
> as building does not depend on portage being there.
Hmm, how do you build an
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 05:32 pm, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> I don't think gcc-config should depend on portage at all. Or does it
> actually use portage services. In any case it should be an RDEPEND, as
> building does not depend on portage being there.
it was added when `portageq` didnt exist everyw
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 23:15, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:50:05PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > > (Trimmed to make things shorter)
> > > [ebuild N] dev-lang/perl-5.8.6-r4 +berkdb
> > > [ebuild N] sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2 +java
> > > [ebuild N]
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 10:50:05PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > (Trimmed to make things shorter)
> > [ebuild N] dev-lang/perl-5.8.6-r4 +berkdb
> > [ebuild N] sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2 +java
> > [ebuild N] dev-java/blackdown-jdk-1.4.2.01-r2
> > (glibc, gcc, gcc-config
On Monday 13 June 2005 19:18, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The bug hit me while working with GLI last night, and now I really do
> need a solution for it. Looking at the dep tree to see why perl pulls
> in openssl, the critical parts of the tree are this:
>
> (Trimmed to make things shorter)
> [ebuild
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lars Weiler schrieb:
> * Robin H. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/06/13 10:18 -0700]:
>
>>3. split java support out of db.
> During stage-building we have USE="-java", but still there
> is a perl/openssl dependency, which I can't track. x86
> seems t
* Robin H. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/06/13 10:18 -0700]:
> 3. split java support out of db.
During stage-building we have USE="-java", but still there
is a perl/openssl dependency, which I can't track. x86
seems to build a stage3 fine, but ppc and amd64 has issues.
Regards, Lars
--
Lars
We/me perl folks are working on it as quickly as we/i can. I'm slated to leave
for vacation this weekend and would hate to drop a change like minimal
support into the tree and then disappear for a week. that said, i plan on
testing the new ebuilds tomorrow if nothing interrupts me. part of the h
The bug hit me while working with GLI last night, and now I really do
need a solution for it. Looking at the dep tree to see why perl pulls
in openssl, the critical parts of the tree are this:
(Trimmed to make things shorter)
[ebuild N] dev-lang/perl-5.8.6-r4 +berkdb
[ebuild N]
17 matches
Mail list logo
