Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Saturday 17 June 2006 02:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> emergen nvidia-glx
>>>
>> OOPS:
>> emerge -vp nvidia-glx
>>
>> Calculating dependencies... done!
>>
>> [blocks B ] >=x11-base/xo
On Saturday 17 June 2006 02:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > No, nvidia-glx is NOT the kernel module. That is nvidia-kernel!
> >
> > You don't have the latest nvidia drivers installed?
> >
> > That might be the culprit!
> >
> > emerge nvidia-ker
On Saturday 17 June 2006 02:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > emergen nvidia-glx
>
> OOPS:
> emerge -vp nvidia-glx
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
>
> [blocks B ] >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.0.99
>(is blocking media-video/nvidia-glx-1.
On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 19:29:40 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Calculating dependencies... done!
>
> [blocks B ] >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.0.99
>(is blocking media-video/nvidia-glx-1.0.8762)
> [ebuild N] media-video/nvidia-glx-1.0.8762
> USE="-dlloader" 0 kB
>
>
> So nvidia
"Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> emergen nvidia-glx
OOPS:
emerge -vp nvidia-glx
Calculating dependencies... done!
[blocks B ] >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.0.99
(is blocking media-video/nvidia-glx-1.0.8762)
[ebuild N] media-video/nvidia-glx-1.0.8762
USE="-dll
"Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, nvidia-glx is NOT the kernel module. That is nvidia-kernel!
>
> You don't have the latest nvidia drivers installed?
>
> That might be the culprit!
>
> emerge nvidia-kernel
> emergen nvidia-glx
> eselect opengl set nvidia (or opengl-update n
On Friday 16 June 2006 16:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> About checking glx. I'm not sure what you meant there... I guess
> nvidia-glx and atis-glx are modules?... Modprobe knows nothing about
> them here. /usr/src/linux/.config shows one setting related to nvidia:
> CONFIG_AGP_NVIDIA=m.
> Can y
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Rumen Yotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Check Bug-125728 for a solution (must change toolchain.eclass in an
>> overlay) and rebuild GCC *or* just manually fix/change broken .la files.
>> ...SKIP...
>
> Can you explain a little more about the manual fix...?
> In the
Rumen Yotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Check Bug-125728 for a solution (must change toolchain.eclass in an
> overlay) and rebuild GCC *or* just manually fix/change broken .la files.
> ...SKIP...
Can you explain a little more about the manual fix...?
In the bug reports one poster mentions setti
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
Try revdep-rebuild, maybe it will solve the problem.
>>> Well it found a pretty basic package to be broken:
>>> gcc-4.1.1F and is not running this:
>>> emerge --oneshot =sys-devel/gcc-4.1.1F
>>>
>>> I think
"Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Try revdep-rebuild, maybe it will solve the problem.
>>
>> Well it found a pretty basic package to be broken:
>> gcc-4.1.1F and is not running this:
>> emerge --oneshot =sys-devel/gcc-4.1.1F
>>
>> I think this will run for a while do th
On Friday 16 June 2006 03:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > well, you gave an example why I never use -D (deep) updates.
> >
> > I bet something 'broke' because a dependency got updated.
>
> What is the advantage of never using `
"Hemmann, Volker Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
>
> well, you gave an example why I never use -D (deep) updates.
>
> I bet something 'broke' because a dependency got updated.
What is the advantage of never using `deep'... seems I recall reading
here that it was sort of necessary afte
13 matches
Mail list logo
