On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 16:48 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 04:41:23 +0200
Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote:
So here the reverting of a masking in gentoo-x86 is quite intentional
and currently desired.
This is fundamentally broken as a concept.
Adding an overlay
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The problem of ebuilds in one overlay not seeing ebuilds in another overlay,
would also be solved by the package manager NOT failing to see/notice/use/allow
ebuilds from all installed overlays. Then there would be no need for a hierarchy
among
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
The problem of ebuilds in one overlay not seeing ebuilds in another overlay,
would also be solved by the package manager NOT failing to
see/notice/use/allow
ebuilds from all installed overlays. Then there would be
2009/3/5 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) hk...@gentoo.org:
The problem of ebuilds in one overlay not seeing ebuilds in another overlay,
would also be solved by the package manager NOT failing to
see/notice/use/allow
ebuilds from all installed overlays. Then there would be no need for a
hierarchy
Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 23:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:55:38 +0100
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
We didn't implement anything but let's just talk about what we wanted
to see. We simply wanted overlay users to keep testing gnome 2.24
components
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
This seems desirable and reasonable.
As I replied to this subject earlier regarding KDE, let me complement
that information. In the case of the KDE team, we keep work on a release
all in the same place, so we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Zac Medico wrote:
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
This seems desirable and reasonable.
As I replied to this subject earlier regarding KDE, let me complement
that information. In the case of the KDE team, we keep work on a release
all in the
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 04:41:23 +0200
Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote:
So here the reverting of a masking in gentoo-x86 is quite intentional
and currently desired.
This is fundamentally broken as a concept.
Adding an overlay should not have any impact upon other repositories.
It should be
Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 16:48 +, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 04:41:23 +0200
Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote:
So here the reverting of a masking in gentoo-x86 is quite
intentional and currently desired.
This is fundamentally broken as a concept.
Adding an
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:55:38 +0100
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
We didn't implement anything but let's just talk about what we wanted
to see. We simply wanted overlay users to keep testing gnome 2.24
components that were masked or using masked packages in
base/package.mask so
A. On K, 2009-02-25 at 04:56 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 01:42:38PM +0100, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit :
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
This is your friendly
11 matches
Mail list logo
