On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Paul Hartman
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
>> cruncher mark # cat .xsession-errors
>> /etc/X11/gdm/Xsession: Beginning session setup...
>> /etc/X11/gdm/Xsession: Cannot find Xclients
>> /etc/X11/gdm/Xsession: line 203: exec: xterm: n
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
> cruncher mark # cat .xsession-errors
> /etc/X11/gdm/Xsession: Beginning session setup...
> /etc/X11/gdm/Xsession: Cannot find Xclients
> /etc/X11/gdm/Xsession: line 203: exec: xterm: not found
> cruncher mark #
>
> cruncher mark # eix -I xterm
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Paul Hartman
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
>> Checking if your kit is complete...
>> Looks good
>> MakeMaker FATAL: prerequisites not found.
>> ExtUtils::Depends not installed
>
> If part of your transition was upgrading from per
Mark Knecht writes:
> OK, let's start with xfce4-meta because there was only one failure.
> eix-update was done this morning and emerge -DuN @system is clean
> using ~arch in make.conf. I'll paste make.conf & emerge --info at the
> end of this message
[...]
> >>> Source prepared.
> >>> Configuring
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Paul Hartman
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
>> Checking if your kit is complete...
>> Looks good
>> MakeMaker FATAL: prerequisites not found.
>>ExtUtils::Depends not installed
>
> If part of your transition was upgrading from perl
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Checking if your kit is complete...
> Looks good
> MakeMaker FATAL: prerequisites not found.
>ExtUtils::Depends not installed
If part of your transition was upgrading from perl 5.8 to 5.10 you
need to run perl-cleaner like the ewarn says i
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 6:07 AM, walt wrote:
> On 04/12/2010 05:35 AM, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> Between xfce4& gnome I've seen about a dozen packages fail to build
>> this morning and haven't yet checked bug reports.
>
> Let's start with xfce4 then because it's much smaller than gnome. What
> fail
On 12/04/2010 13:42, William Kenworthy wrote:
Is there a reason why you want to run all @system as ~amd64, and the
rest stable. To me it makes more sense (especially for production
Perhaps he simply doesn't feel like re-installing. By going down this
road, the breakage caused by dowgrading sy
On 04/12/2010 05:35 AM, Mark Knecht wrote:
Between xfce4& gnome I've seen about a dozen packages fail to build
this morning and haven't yet checked bug reports.
Let's start with xfce4 then because it's much smaller than gnome. What
fails to build, and with what errors?
I actually use gnome,
On 12/04/2010 12:57, Mark Knecht wrote:
QUESTION: Assume I'm happy with ~amd64 on @system, but want to build
the stable version of gnome or kde. How do I get it? Since gnome-2.26
You could opt to retain the ~amd64 keyword on system packages alone.
Consider the following (which requires portage
10 matches
Mail list logo
