Graham Murray wrote:
> Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>Note that it is not necessary to remerge anything other than glibc
>>when the nptlonly flag is flipped because the nptl threading library
>>is supposed to be compatible with linuxthreads.
>
>
> While in the main that is true, n
Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Note that it is not necessary to remerge anything other than glibc
> when the nptlonly flag is flipped because the nptl threading library
> is supposed to be compatible with linuxthreads.
While in the main that is true, nptl is not completely compatible (e
fire-eyes wrote:
> I then took off nptlonly, did an
> emerge -e world, and here I am left with tons of problems.
Note that it is not necessary to remerge anything other than glibc when the
nptlonly flag is flipped because the nptl threading library is supposed to be
compatible with linuxthreads.
fire-eyes wrote:
> Rumen Yotov wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>Check if your perl is compiled with "ithreads" USE-flag.
>>I have it ON with no problems but there's an warning in it's
>>description (if enabled).
>>HTH.Rumen
>
>
> You're right, it is on. Which is interesting, because I had problems in
> the p
Rumen Yotov wrote:
> Hi,
> Check if your perl is compiled with "ithreads" USE-flag.
> I have it ON with no problems but there's an warning in it's
> description (if enabled).
> HTH.Rumen
You're right, it is on. Which is interesting, because I had problems in
the past with that, and I thought I ha
Walter Dnes wrote:
I can make mistakes, and this looks like one. My corrected
interpretation is that accepting *ALL* ~X86 is a problem.
Not a problem per say, but it will make you use packages that are
flagged for ebuild testing (the package *should* be stable but the
ebuild might not be).
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:48:29 -0400
fire-eyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Zac Medico wrote:
>
> > Your build logs show that in both cases you got segmentation faults
> > when running perl. I suggest that you roll back to the last
> > working version of perl that you had.
> >
> > Zac
>
> Well,
On Sun, Sep 25, 2005 at 06:09:15PM +0200, Nagatoro wrote
> Sure? I just installed a ~x86 chroot. And emerge --info shows x86 _and_
> ~x86 (only ~x86 in make.conf).
I can make mistakes, and this looks like one. My corrected
interpretation is that accepting *ALL* ~X86 is a problem. If someone
On Sun, Sep 25, 2005 at 03:04:48AM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote
A mistake has been pointed out to me in my previous reply. Apparently
setting accept ~X86 will also accept X86. I still believe that
accepting all of ~X86 is a bad idea. It's the equivalant of Debian
unstable. If you want/need a cou
Zac Medico wrote:
> Your build logs show that in both cases you got segmentation faults when
> running perl. I suggest that you roll back to the last working version of
> perl that you had.
>
> Zac
Well, it was the same version of perl actually, however I have remerged
it and still run into t
Walter Dnes wrote:
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 12:26:20PM -0400, fire-eyes wrote
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="x86 ~x86" RRRGGGHHH N
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" is OK (sort of) if you want strictly testing
and bleeding edge. Expect some breakage along the way, but it shouldn't
die
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 12:26:20PM -0400, fire-eyes wrote
> Hello, I am hoping I can get some assistance here. These problems are
> probably specific to my system. These and many other irritants cropped
> up after I enabled nptl and nptlonly. I then took off nptlonly, did an
> emerge -e world, and
fire-eyes wrote:
>
> p.s. - ntplonly USE flag is bad news, stay away from it.
>
Why blame random things when you have no clue what the actual problem is? I
for one have used nptlonly for a while with no problems.
Your build logs show that in both cases you got segmentation faults when
runnin
13 matches
Mail list logo
