* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
That is exactly what the xorg-x11 metapackage is designed to do.
Not exactly. The xorg-x11 package pulls in much more than
just the server w/ some drivers.
cu
--
-
Enrico
On Sat, 19 May 2007 07:00:58 +0400, Kent Fredric [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
...
Imo, the cyclic dep problem could be solved as thus,
A depends B
B depends C||A
Where C is a minimalist subset of A required for building B, which is
only depended on if A is not present.
A is also a
On Monday 21 May 2007, Andrey Gerasimenko wrote:
Just curious: why nobody suggests to allow Portage to use the
preferred method of binary distros: emerge several interdependent
packages in one transaction. Just prepare the source for A and B and
compile both in any order. IMHO this is what
Hi,
On Mon, 21 May 2007 13:57:14 +0400 Andrey Gerasimenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Just curious: why nobody suggests to allow Portage to use the
preferred method of binary distros: emerge several interdependent
packages in one transaction.
Because this just wouldn't work. They're not called
* Kent Fredric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi folks,
Imo, the cyclic dep problem could be solved as thus,
A depends B
B depends C||A
Where C is a minimalist subset of A required for building B,
which is only depended on if A is not present.
A is also a replacement for C.
Beware of
On Sun, 20 May 2007 18:49:31 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
The circular dependencies between Xserver and drivers do not come
from upstream. They're artificial. If we just want an simple-to-use
package which gets the Xserver *and* drivers based on useflags
(which IMHO is an good idea), it's
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
The circular dependencies between Xserver and drivers do not come
from upstream. They're artificial. If we just want an simple-to-use
package which gets the Xserver *and* drivers based on useflags
(which IMHO is an good idea), it's quite trivial to do this by an
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
BTW: some people expressed (within this thread), that Gentoo was too
easy to use and should be made more complicated. Funny, isn't it ?
No, that is not funny, but I'll tell you what is humorous. That all
three posters involved in saying Gentoo was too easy were
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
The circular dependencies between Xserver and drivers do not come
from upstream. They're artificial. If we just want an simple-to-use
package which gets the Xserver *and* drivers based on useflags
(which IMHO is an good idea), it's quite trivial to do this by an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ATI has nice graphics maybe (I still prefer nVidia), but they
are not friendly to the Open Source World.
AMD announced last week that they will be releasing ATI drivers as OSS:
On Thu, 17 May 2007 18:03:21 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
If A depends on B and B depends on A, you build A without support
for B, then you can safely install B and A again with the features
you wanted.
Great idea. Lots of redundant compiles and manual work just because
unclean
-Original Message-
From: Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 7:02 PM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo gets as bad SuSE: Circular
dependencies [WAS: Thank you Gentoo devs]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED
* Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ATI has nice graphics maybe (I still prefer nVidia), but they
are not friendly to the Open Source World.
AMD announced last week that they will be releasing ATI
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So yes, that is a circular dependency, even without Gentoo involved.
Not everything is simple, and not everything is cut and dry. Sometimes
the problem is not directly the package manager's fault. Give them time
to work out all the glitches. 7.2 is fairly new. The
Quite Erroneous Debate?
Jakub is no longer a bug-wrangler, or a dev, he retired last month.
Ah, good things still happen ? ;P
Jakub was very good at his job, but he does have an attitude problem.
Are you trying to emulate him, you are already halfway there?
Give the guy a break :P. When
On Thursday 17 May 2007 00.17.29 Neil Bothwick wrote:
Jakub is no longer a bug-wrangler, or a dev, he retired last month.
Did he really? He's still jakub on bugzilla, -dev IRC.
--
Naga
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 03:44:41PM +0200, Naga Toro wrote:
On Thursday 17 May 2007 00.17.29 Neil Bothwick wrote:
Jakub is no longer a bug-wrangler, or a dev, he retired last month.
Did he really? He's still jakub on bugzilla, -dev IRC.
Jakub didn't go through with his retirement after the
* Bo Ørsted Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
*What* are you talking about? PDEPENDs are packages that should be emerged
*after* the package in question. That A depends on B to be emerged *after* A
and B depends on A to be emerged *before* B does not produce a circular
dependency!
* Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
At least several. I didn't find an good solution for checking
the whole tree yet, so I yet know some. Good candidates are
where PDEPENDs occour. For example the Xserver.
As Bo has already explained, PDEPENDS cannot cause circular
* Bo Ørsted Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Enrico's 'brilliant' solution is to split packages like Debian
Ah, now it get interesting.
The primary directive: We are not Debian,
If Debian does something, Gentoo must do it completely different.
*lol*
snip
(which again makes me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Come on, Enrico, you KNOW you're acting like the typical mailing list troll,
so, would you please
unsbuscribe, shut up, or something like that? You definitely need to read HOWTO
Critize
(constructively).
And I could use some support from the rest
On Donnerstag, 17. Mai 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
It *P*DEPENDs on them. That's an (strange) kind of special dependency
which is pulled in *after* install, instead of *before*. But still
it is an dependency.
So, Xserver dependens on driver(s), drivers depend on Xserver.
Circular
On Thursday 17 May 2007 18:10:29 Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Enrico's 'brilliant' solution is to split packages like Debian
Ah, now it get interesting.
The primary directive: We are not Debian,
If Debian does something, Gentoo must do it completely different.
Nonono. It's: We are not a binary
On Thursday 17 May 2007, Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo gets as bad SuSE: Circular
dependencies [WAS: Thank you Gentoo devs]':
Come on, Enrico, you KNOW you're acting like the typical mailing list
troll, so, would you please unsbuscribe, shut
On 5/16/07, Iain Buchanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 15:51 -0700, kashani wrote:
Is it the end of another semester already[1][2]? Are we already due to
be subjected to the highly dubious ideas of Mr. Weigelt sporadically
over summer break?
kashani
1. search for
-Original Message-
From: Hemmann, Volker Armin
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 2:22 AM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo gets as bad SuSE: Circular
dependencies [WAS: Thank you Gentoo devs]
On Donnerstag, 17. Mai 2007
Hi folks,
I also want to say Thank you to the gentoo devs.
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
Cirular deps have been really sucking in SuSE and were one
of the major for dropping it to me.
Great, great thanks to the
On Wed, 16 May 2007 16:23:13 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
Lots? If you'd posted this yesterday, I would have been able to recall
the last time I was hit with one.
Great, great
* Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2007 16:23:13 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
Lots? If you'd posted this yesterday, I would have been able to recall
the
On Wednesday 16 May 2007 16:54:13 Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2007 16:23:13 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
Lots? If you'd posted this yesterday, I would[n't] have been able
Hi Enrico,
I also want to say Thank you to the gentoo devs.
Yes, thanks for a very very great job... I was installed gentoo a few months
ago and I don't want anything else...
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
On Wednesday 16 May 2007 17:47:37 Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
Lots? If you'd posted this yesterday, I would have been able to recall
the last time I was hit with one.
At least
On 5/16/07, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which problem from the upstream ?
I'm a little bit involved in Xorg development (especially on the
modularizing project), so if you tell me the problem, I could fix it.
The problem w/ x11-base/xorg-server are the PDEPENDs on (external)
driver
On Wed, 16 May 2007 15:54:13 +0100
Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The great thing about free software is that it all comes with a full
money back guarantee. So before you start shooting your mouth off when
something produced by volunteers in their own time fails to work for
you, stop
On Wednesday 16 May 2007 10:23:13 am Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Hi folks,
I also want to say Thank you to the gentoo devs.
Thank you for producing lots of circular dependencies
(ie. in the Xserver), which make maintenance complicated.
?
I haven't seen one... in years...
Cirular deps have
Jerry McBride wrote:
?
I haven't seen one... in years...
I think maybe you should look your gentoo over again... you've done something
really STUPID.
I haven't had one in a long while either. I have ran into blocked
packages or something minor like that but that's to be
On Wed, 16 May 2007 17:51:20 +0200, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
Circular dependencies are mostly a problem for new users since as soon
as the dependencies are installed the circular dependencies are
satisfied and hence irrelevant.
I know, it was in a new install that I got hit.
The real
On Wed, 16 May 2007 17:47:37 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Lots? If you'd posted this yesterday, I would have been able to recall
the last time I was hit with one.
At least several. I didn't find an good solution for checking
the whole tree yet, so I yet know some. Good candidates are
Neil Bothwick wrote:
You mean I shouldn't have copied over a make.conf from another machine
without checking? ;-)
I think the important point about this was that it was such a trivial
hiccup to fix - USE=-directfb emerge -1 libsdl - then continue with the
previous emerge.
Neil, I
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I did get a circular dependency today, sdl and directfb and guess what?
The error message also contained the solution, which was to temporarily
change a USE flag.
*rofl* what a good solution. really clean. gread idea.
snip
Is
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 15:51 -0700, kashani wrote:
Is it the end of another semester already[1][2]? Are we already due to
be subjected to the highly dubious ideas of Mr. Weigelt sporadically
over summer break?
kashani
1. search for Enrico Weigelt on gmane and sort by date in the Gentoo
On Wed, 16 May 2007 17:40:20 -0500, Dale wrote:
I think the important point about this was that it was such a trivial
hiccup to fix - USE=-directfb emerge -1 libsdl - then continue with
the previous emerge.
Neil, I know you know more about this than I do but I always do a emerge
-uN
42 matches
Mail list logo
