-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
| The new categories are x11-apps, x11-proto and x11-drivers. Of these,
| the name for x11-proto (the protocol headers) is debatable. The upstream
| module they're all in is called proto, and their pkg-config (*.pc)
| files are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Frysinger schrieb:
| On Monday 01 August 2005 10:43 pm, Danny van Dyk wrote:
|
|chillispot at least is not wrong. If USE=pic is set, it compiles _only
|with_ -fPIC, ommiting to compile files twice and effectivly telling
|libtool not to produce a
On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 10:22:01AM +0100, Tom Martin wrote:
Hi list,
Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
later today.
You may want to read over this thread from April when the logrotate USE
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
I'm still awaiting any solid arguments against x11-proto, and they had
best be expedited (read below for why).
Well, I kind of mentioned it on irc, but I'll throw it out here too.
I think the name proto is pretty vague and would prefer
to see headers
On Monday 01 August 2005 10:43 pm, Danny van Dyk wrote:
Mike Frysinger schrieb:
|your USE=pic example is wrong, it does not change CFLAGS (and if your
|package does, it is broken)
chillispot at least is not wrong. If USE=pic is set, it compiles _only
with_ -fPIC, ommiting to compile files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Martin wrote:
| Hi list,
|
| Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
| packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
| later today.
I think this flag is a bad idea. Why should I have to recompile
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Martin wrote:
| Hi list,
|
| Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
| packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
| later today.
I think this flag is a bad idea. Why
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 02:23:06PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Your suggestion of adding a few new virtuals is a good idea, but I think
the metabuilds for libraries, drivers, etc. can substitute for it. It's
not clear to me that there are many common configurations that could be
dealt with
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 09:48:25 -0700 Donnie Berkholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Tom Martin wrote:
| | Hi list,
| |
| | Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
| | packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
| | later today.
|
| I think this flag is
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 09:48:25 -0700 Donnie Berkholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Tom Martin wrote:
| | Hi list,
| |
| | Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
| | packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
| | later today.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Files in /etc are expensive in terms of sysadmin time. The only things
| in /etc should be things that are both necessary and likely to be
| modified by a sysadmin.
So we should stop installing example files, too?
-BEGIN
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Tom Martin wrote:
| Hi list,
|
| Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
| packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
| later today.
I think this flag is a bad idea. Why should I have to recompile a
package to get
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 13:48:17 -0400 Alec Joseph Warner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Files in /etc are expensive in terms of sysadmin time. The only
| things in /etc should be things that are both necessary and likely
| to be modified by a sysadmin.
|
| And who makes that call, shouldn't the
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 10:52:44 -0700 Donnie Berkholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| | Files in /etc are expensive in terms of sysadmin time. The only
| | things in /etc should be things that are both necessary and likely
| | to be modified by a sysadmin.
|
| So we should stop
If I understand correctly, all of the packages in x11-proto will only
install header files. Are these header files ever useful on their own
though? Would it make more sense to include the header files
in various library packages?
--
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote:
| If I understand correctly, all of the packages in x11-proto will only
| install header files. Are these header files ever useful on their own
| though? Would it make more sense to include the header files
| in various
On 2/8/2005 16:30:45, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
I'm still awaiting any solid arguments against x11-proto, and they had
best be expedited (read below for why).
Well, I kind of mentioned it on irc, but I'll throw it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As a further note on this:
We will be dropping all patches that are not upstream and are not
obviously Gentoo-specific configuration changes.
If you want your patch back in, you will _need_ to file it upstream and
have it committed before we will
Hi all,
Lot of bugs with single changes now that the cleanup/reorganisation of the
remaining bugs has begun. I've attached the script I use to generate this
as well. If anybody would like to poke at it so that the list can be
cleared of reassigned and closed bugs, I would be quite thankful.
19 matches
Mail list logo
