Recent major changes in initng have resulted in core/plugins and ifiles (initscripts) being separated in svn, so initng-9999.ebuild has been split into initng-9999 and initng-ifiles-9999. An ebuild for release version 0.5.5, dated yesterday is also included. In the svn ebuilds, we have elected to use USE_EXPAND for enabling and disabling initng plugins, it would be appreciated if USE_EXPAND="INITNG_PLUGINS" could be set globally to make this easier for our users. The new initng-9999 ebuild does however work fine on portage 2.0.x where USE_EXPAND is not present.
Created attachment 81751 [details] initng-0.5.5.ebuild
Created attachment 81752 [details] initng-9999.ebuild
Created attachment 81753 [details] initng-ifiles-9999.ebuild
Created attachment 81764 [details] sys-apps/initng-ifiles-9999 http://svn.initng.thinktux.net/initng-ifiles/trunk is our trunk.
*** Bug 128436 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This bug is related to -9999 which is not in ~arch, contrary to -0.6.0. Why is my bug 128436 considered a duplicate?
Please make certain that the initng-ifiles package is in portage before altering initng-0.6.0. This has created unstable systems without warning to the end user (at least until "emerge" finds a way to package all the einfo messages and displays them to the user - that information flys past the screen when you're letting the machine rebuild over night because of an update to X.org, KDE, qt, etc.) I rebooted my machine to lose all network access. Thankfully another machine was able to access this forum. Peter, it happens so often that developers (myself included) forget what's in and what's outside of the ~arch trees. This is just such a situation. Try downgrading to 0.5.4 until it's fixed. Them's the brakes while enjoying bleeding-edge technology :)
*** Bug 131087 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 128923 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 128945 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Uh, can we remove/package.mask the obviously broken 0.6.0 version until this is sorted out?
outdated
So there will never be any functional initng >=0.6.0 in portage? Nice way to kill a bug
why dont you do a little research before opening your mouth for starters, read Bug 135904
Actually, while it's nothing to get in a huffy over it would have been much more informative to put that in the comments in the first place, "Hey people, we're moving this bug..." rather than having 20 people "researching" for the right bug.
well there's nothing to research now, 0.6.7 is in portage
