Apparently, though unproven, at 21:26 on Friday 29 October 2010, Fatih Tümen
did opine thusly:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 21:18, Alan McKinnon
wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 18:46 on Friday 29 October 2010, Fatih
> > Tümen
> >
> > did opine thusly:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Is there a way
Apparently, though unproven, at 20:45 on Friday 29 October 2010, Mick did
opine thusly:
> I noticed this error with the autoheader as shown below:
>
> * Applying xulrunner-1.9.2-gtk+-2.21.patch ... [
> ok ] * Running eautoreconf in '/var/tmp/portage/www-
> client/firefox
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 21:18, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 18:46 on Friday 29 October 2010, Fatih Tümen
> did opine thusly:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there a way tell portage to build binary package before removing it
>> from the system?
>>
>> man emerge says:
>> --buildpkg (-b)
I noticed this error with the autoheader as shown below:
* Applying xulrunner-1.9.2-gtk+-2.21.patch ... [ ok ]
* Running eautoreconf in '/var/tmp/portage/www-
client/firefox-3.6.12/work/mozilla-1.9.2' ...
* Running autoconf ...
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:46 on Friday 29 October 2010, Fatih Tümen
did opine thusly:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a way tell portage to build binary package before removing it
> from the system?
>
> man emerge says:
> --buildpkg (-b)
> Tells emerge to build binary packages for
Hi,
Is there a way tell portage to build binary package before removing it
from the system?
man emerge says:
--buildpkg (-b)
Tells emerge to build binary packages for all ebuilds
processed in addition to actually **merging** the packages.
[...]
An alte
Apparently, though unproven, at 09:58 on Friday 29 October 2010, Fatih Tümen
did opine thusly:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 21:21, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:11:42 +0300, Fatih Tümen wrote:
> >> I agree putting -hal is not a good idea unless you dare to break the
> >> packages
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 21:21, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 18:11:42 +0300, Fatih Tümen wrote:
>
>> I agree putting -hal is not a good idea unless you dare to break the
>> packages that need hal. But I think there is a third option here
>
> Packages that need hal won't have a hal use
8 matches
Mail list logo