On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 01:39 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:58:14 -0400
> Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Sep 18 2011, walt wrote:
> >
> > > I just did a routine update on my ~amd64 machine and saw the portage
> > > warning that libpng14 has been replaced by libpng15, an
On 09/19/2011 07:10 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:06:30 -0700
> walt wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 01:39 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>> On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:58:14 -0400
>>> Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>>>
On Sun, Sep 18 2011, walt wrote:
> I just did a routine
On 09/18/2011 11:10 PM, walt wrote:
I just did a routine update on my ~amd64 machine and saw the portage
warning that libpng14 has been replaced by libpng15, and I should run
revdep-rebuild --library '/usr/lib/libpng14.so' and then delete the
obsolete library.
Oh crap. I somehow missed that (a
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:06:30 -0700
walt wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 01:39 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:58:14 -0400
> > Allan Gottlieb wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Sep 18 2011, walt wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just did a routine update on my ~amd64 machine and saw the
> > >
On Mon, Sep 19 2011, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> > revdep-rebuild checks everything, revdep-rebuild --library
>> > checks just some things.
>> >
>> > ebuilds sometimes issue messages to check just the libraries known
>> > to have been updated, but a full revdep-rebuild after an update
>> > will catch
On Monday, 19. September 2011 10:20:25 Allan Gottlieb wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19 2011, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >> > revdep-rebuild checks everything, revdep-rebuild --library
> >> > checks just some things.
> >> >
> >> > ebuilds sometimes issue messages to check just the libraries known
> >> > to have
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19 2011, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>>> > revdep-rebuild checks everything, revdep-rebuild --library
>>> > checks just some things.
>>> >
>>> > ebuilds sometimes issue messages to check just the libraries known
>>> > to have been upda
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:10:02 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] Re: Updating libpng: another libtool cockup?:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 03:06:30 -0700
> walt wrote:
[snip]
> > I don't skip the --library step any more.
>
> That's odd behaviour, I wonde
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>> ajglap gottlieb # revdep-rebuild; revdep-rebuild --library
>> '/usr/lib64/libpng14.so.14'
>
> Is there no automated way to catch these? --library expects an
> argument; how do I kno
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>
>>> ajglap gottlieb # revdep-rebuild; revdep-rebuild --library
>>> '/usr/lib64/libpng14.so.14'
>
>>
>> Is there no automated w
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Allan Gottlieb wrote:
>>
ajglap gottlieb # revdep-rebuild; revdep-rebuild --library
On Monday 19 September 2011 16:49:55 David W Noon wrote:
> I hope this has explained why we should take messages about running
> "revdep-rebuild --library libXXX" seriously.
Well, you have me convinced. I had assumed that a bland revdep-rebuild would
catch everything including the library specif
On Monday, 19. September 2011 13:52:26 Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Allan Gottlieb
wrote:
> >>
>
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
> On Monday, 19. September 2011 13:52:26 Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> /lib64/libncurses.so.5 & /lib64/libncurses.so.6 could both exist on
>> the system even if both version of the ncurses package don't.
>
> That's right. But keep in mind,
Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday 19 September 2011 16:49:55 David W Noon wrote:
>
> > I hope this has explained why we should take messages about running
> > "revdep-rebuild --library libXXX" seriously.
>
> Well, you have me convinced. I had assumed that a bland revdep-rebuild would
> catch
On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 18:29:44 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Well, you have me convinced. I had assumed that a bland
> > revdep-rebuild would catch everything including the library
> > specified. Wrong, I see.
> Would preserved-rebuild catch everything that the revdep-rebuild fails
> to
16 matches
Mail list logo
