Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-25 Thread Petteri Räty
On 01/17/2010 11:12 PM, David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 17 January 2010 20:38:48 Petteri Räty wrote: With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't annoy users any more with ebeep or epause so attached is a patch only defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1 and 2. Anyone

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-19 Thread Peter Volkov
В Втр, 19/01/2010 в 01:22 +0200, Petteri Räty пишет: On 01/18/2010 03:02 PM, Tiziano Müller wrote: The proper replacement for such interactive notifications when called in pkg_setup is pkg_pretend, which will (hopefully) be available in EAPI 4. Thus I'd keep them around until then. ebeep

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-19 Thread Petteri Räty
On 01/19/2010 10:37 AM, Peter Volkov wrote: В Втр, 19/01/2010 в 01:22 +0200, Petteri Räty пишет: On 01/18/2010 03:02 PM, Tiziano Müller wrote: The proper replacement for such interactive notifications when called in pkg_setup is pkg_pretend, which will (hopefully) be available in EAPI 4. Thus

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-18 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Petteri Räty wrote: With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't annoy users any more with ebeep or epause Agreed. so attached is a patch only defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1 and 2. Anyone have a reason to keep these around for EAPI 3? We

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-18 Thread Tiziano Müller
The proper replacement for such interactive notifications when called in pkg_setup is pkg_pretend, which will (hopefully) be available in EAPI 4. Thus I'd keep them around until then. Cheers, Tiziano Am Sonntag, den 17.01.2010, 22:38 +0200 schrieb Petteri Räty: With GLEP 42 and proper logging

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-18 Thread Petteri Räty
On 01/18/2010 03:02 PM, Tiziano Müller wrote: The proper replacement for such interactive notifications when called in pkg_setup is pkg_pretend, which will (hopefully) be available in EAPI 4. Thus I'd keep them around until then. Cheers, Tiziano ebeep or epause don't make your ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-18 Thread Petteri Räty
On 01/18/2010 10:07 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Petteri Räty wrote: With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't annoy users any more with ebeep or epause Agreed. so attached is a patch only defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1 and 2. Anyone

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-17 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 17.1.2010 21:38, Petteri Räty napsal(a): With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't annoy users any more with ebeep or epause so attached is a patch only defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1 and 2. Anyone have a

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-17 Thread David Leverton
On Sunday 17 January 2010 20:38:48 Petteri Räty wrote: With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't annoy users any more with ebeep or epause so attached is a patch only defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1 and 2. Anyone have a reason to keep these around for EAPI 3?

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: don't define ebeep and epause in eutils in EAPI 3

2010-01-17 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Sunday 17 January 2010 16:12:29 David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 17 January 2010 20:38:48 Petteri Räty wrote: With GLEP 42 and proper logging of e* messages I think we shouldn't annoy users any more with ebeep or epause so attached is a patch only defines these functions for EAPIs 0, 1