On Sonntag 18 Oktober 2009, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:10:22 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > > eix lafilefixer 0.17s user 0.05s system 17% cpu 1.251 total
> > > emerge -s lafilefixer 8.64s user 1.46s system 42% cpu 23.803 total
> >
> > and the difference is still just a
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:10:22 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > eix lafilefixer 0.17s user 0.05s system 17% cpu 1.251 total
> > emerge -s lafilefixer 8.64s user 1.46s system 42% cpu 23.803 total
> and the difference is still just a second
I think your calculator needs new batteries. 23.8 -
On Samstag 17 Oktober 2009, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:30:32 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > > My point was that using eix is faster than posting to the list and
> > > awaiting a reply. The same is not necessarily true of emerge -s :(
> >
> > depends on your harddisk and f
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 11:30:32 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > My point was that using eix is faster than posting to the list and
> > awaiting a reply. The same is not necessarily true of emerge -s :(
> >
>
> depends on your harddisk and filesystem. emerge -s can be as fast as
> eix on my
On Samstag 17 Oktober 2009, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:10:22 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > > eix could have told you that.
> >
> > or emerge -s
>
> My point was that using eix is faster than posting to the list and
> awaiting a reply. The same is not necessarily true of
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:10:22 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > eix could have told you that.
>
> or emerge -s
My point was that using eix is faster than posting to the list and
awaiting a reply. The same is not necessarily true of emerge -s :(
--
Neil Bothwick
Politicians are like nappi
On Friday 16 October 2009 13:04:31 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:59:46 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > Run lafilefixer --justfixit.
> >
> > I don't have an lafilefixer; which package is it in?
>
> eix could have told you that.
Ah, yes, sorry - it didn't look like a package name
On Freitag 16 Oktober 2009, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:59:46 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > Run lafilefixer --justfixit.
> >
> > I don't have an lafilefixer; which package is it in?
>
> eix could have told you that.
>
or emerge -s
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:59:46 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > Run lafilefixer --justfixit.
>
> I don't have an lafilefixer; which package is it in?
eix could have told you that.
--
Neil Bothwick
Duct tape is the just like the Force: it has a light side, a dark side,
and binds the universe
On Friday 16 October 2009 12:37:04 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> The elog message from the last libogg install explains this.
Hmm, I think that's too long ago.
> Run lafilefixer --justfixit.
I don't have an lafilefixer; which package is it in?
--
Rgds
Peter
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:20:30 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> I thought I'd have a play with swami, but the emerge fails with
> "/bin/sed: can't read /usr/lib64/libogg.la: No such file or directory",
> and indeed there is none such.
The elog message from the last libogg install explains this. Run
l
Hello list,
I thought I'd have a play with swami, but the emerge fails with "/bin/sed:
can't read /usr/lib64/libogg.la: No such file or directory", and indeed there
is none such.
I have libogg installed, and the files it's put into /usr/lib64 are:
/usr/lib64/libogg.a
/usr/lib64/libogg.so -> lib
12 matches
Mail list logo
