Summary: | sys-apps/portage-2.2* should give a warning if installed package does not match list of licences in ACCEPT_LICENSE. dev-java/sun-jdk as an example | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Anton Bolshakov <anton.bugs> |
Component: | [OLD] baselayout | Assignee: | Java team <java> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | chemacg, steffen.bergner, Tanktalus |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 10.0 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Anton Bolshakov
2009-11-09 11:49:12 UTC
Yes, you need to accept the license, it's the new thing in portage 2.2 - see the man page section as it suggests. The gentoo handbook is indeed not yet updated, so duping the bug. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 292445 *** # Accept any license ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" into /etc/make.conf *** Bug 292639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** May I please suggest that portage should print a warning concerning the license if it "forgets" that a package is installed because the license does not match? In the above command the warning was printed, but if you had just installed sun-jdk before as in bug 292639, just an (actually unneeded) dependency is pulled in, and the user cannot see why this is happening, even worse: He might not even notice that something is wrong. I do not understand anyway why a masking of an *installed* package *tacitly* modifies the dependency tree as if it has not been installed. At least, a big fat warning should be printed in such a case, generally. Something is not write here ;-) It has nothing to do with java team. Guys, this bug is closed, please submit your suggestions in the bug #292445. (In reply to comment #3) > *** Bug 292639 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Please mark further bugs as a duplicate of bug #292445 as well. Thanks. *** Bug 293153 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Ok, bug #292639 is about a handbook, so I'm reopening this one for portage team. See Comment #4 for a better description of the problem. (In reply to comment #7) > Ok, bug #292639 is about a handbook, so I'm reopening this one for portage > team. > See Comment #4 for a better description of the problem. > bug #292445 I instead to say. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 288083 *** |