These lines in make.conf, makes ufed terminate with an error. FEATURES="parallel-fetch"# ccache distcc" Missing support for handling source? source /usr/portage/local/layman/make.conf
Please always attach your emerge --info. Otherwise, at the very least there's no way to tell which version you're using, but it includes other info that's generally needed for a bug report to be useful as well. > FEATURES="parallel-fetch"# ccache distcc" Bug #151086. > source /usr/portage/local/layman/make.conf Bug #131275. Both should be fixed in the current version (0.40-r6) already -- which, assuming no more bugs pop up, can be stabilised shortly after Christmas. I'm closing this bug as WORKSFORME because it's not possible to mark it as a duplicate of two separate bugs, and no other option comes closer to being appropriate.
(In reply to comment #1) > Please always attach your emerge --info. Otherwise, at the very least there's > no way to tell which version you're using, but it includes other info that's > generally needed for a bug report to be useful as well. Or maybe it wasn't needed... > > > FEATURES="parallel-fetch"# ccache distcc" > > Bug #151086. > > > source /usr/portage/local/layman/make.conf > > Bug #131275. > It wasn't needed at all... but you still felt it was necessary to educate me. Seems like I'm waisting my time even bothering to report bugs. I really want to know why searching for ufed doesn't show the bugs. (Thats a rhetorical question...) If you spend a little less time on being rude and a little more improving bugs.gentoo.org then everything would work out better.
(In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > Please always attach your emerge --info. Otherwise, at the very least there's > > no way to tell which version you're using, but it includes other info that's > > generally needed for a bug report to be useful as well. > > Or maybe it wasn't needed... If the issues hadn't been addressed yet, the info would've been necessary. And I'm sure you can agree that assuming they have already been addressed is not a good idea. > It wasn't needed at all... but you still felt it was necessary to educate me. > Seems like I'm waisting my time even bothering to report bugs. > > I really want to know why searching for ufed doesn't show the bugs. (Thats a > rhetorical question...) I'll answer it anyway: because you didn't search for closed bugs. The bugzilla front page mentions to affix ALL to your query, but it should mention it must be prefixed. (This has been reported already.) And when you search for "ALL ufed" (without quotation marks), the bugs show up without a problem. > If you spend a little less time on being rude and a little more improving > bugs.gentoo.org then everything would work out better. I honestly don't see rudeness from my part in this bug report. Also, I am not even able to work on bugs.gentoo.org. Even if I had access, I simply lack the required knowledge of bugzilla's internals. If you have concrete suggestions on how to improve it, though, they're probably welcome, either in a new bug here, or in a new bug upstream (in mozilla's bug tracker, I believe), depending on the type of suggestion.
