Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Does anyone want|need a static (lib)perl still?

2006-01-18 Thread Michael Cummings
On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:18 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: Portage is not the only important system tool. Some of us actually use Perl. Please do not be with the breaking. Is this to say there is a valid need for both libperl.a and libperl.so on your box? (really asking, honest). This isn't about

Re: [gentoo-dev] Find apps not ported to modular X

2006-01-18 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Donnie Berkholz wrote: And here's a list, with herds and maintainers, of a loop across each category in PORTDIR. This should be a fairly comprehensive list of every app not yet ported. Today's update, synced as of about an hour ago, along with the script to generate everything if you want to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Find apps not ported to modular X

2006-01-18 Thread Sebastian Bergmann
Donnie Berkholz schrieb: dev-php/PECL-imagick php none This package only has DEPEND=${DEPEND} =media-gfx/graphicsmagick-1.0.0 listed as its dependencies. -- Sebastian Bergmann http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/ GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Does anyone want|need a static (lib)perl still?

2006-01-18 Thread Drake Wyrm
Michael Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:18 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: Portage is not the only important system tool. Some of us actually use Perl. Please do not be with the breaking. Is this to say there is a valid need for both libperl.a and libperl.so on your

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Does anyone want|need a static (lib)perl still?

2006-01-18 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wednesday 18 January 2006 09:27, Drake Wyrm wrote: Michael Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:18 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: Portage is not the only important system tool. Some of us actually use Perl. Please do not be with the breaking. Is this to say there is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Does anyone want|need a static (lib)perl still?

2006-01-18 Thread Michael Cummings
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 06:27 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: Personally, no, but others do. I should have been less ambiguous (and obnoxious) in my initial response. Please don't assume that just because _you_ don't need a static Perl, that _nobody_ needs a static Perl. Actually, the whole point to my

[gentoo-dev] Request for ebuild (with a cash backer)

2006-01-18 Thread Caleb Tennis
Hi all, I need an ebuild for GPL Ice C++ (http://www.zeroc.com/download.html) and I simply don't have the time to write it at the moment. If someone is willing to take on the task of writing it, and submitting to me (or even better helping me to maintain it in the portage tree) I'm willing to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Find apps not ported to modular X

2006-01-18 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Sebastian Bergmann wrote: Donnie Berkholz schrieb: dev-php/PECL-imagick php none This package only has DEPEND=${DEPEND} =media-gfx/graphicsmagick-1.0.0 listed as its dependencies. Ah, yes. It will also catch whether anything in the dependency tree of any app is broken, not just the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Find apps not ported to modular X

2006-01-18 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Donnie Berkholz wrote: I hacked together a script this afternoon to find any packages that are not yet ported to modular X. It will only work on systems _with modular X installed_. This is because it works by using emerge to check for blockers, then resolving those blockers down to a single

Re: [gentoo-dev] Request for ebuild (with a cash backer)

2006-01-18 Thread Caleb Tennis
Follow up: Two devs have already mailed me on it. Thanks, Caleb -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Find apps not ported to modular X

2006-01-18 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Donnie Berkholz wrote: My current script seems to miss some things. The reason this happens is that the group of applications they're emerged in also contains some app that breaks the emerge, perhaps because it's in package.mask or isn't keyworded at least ~x86. Broken emerges don't get far

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Does anyone want|need a static (lib)perl still?

2006-01-18 Thread Drake Wyrm
Michael Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 06:27 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote: Personally, no, but others do. I should have been less ambiguous (and obnoxious) in my initial response. Please don't assume that just because _you_ don't need a static Perl, that _nobody_ needs a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] SQLite backend?

2006-01-18 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 02:01:29AM -0200, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: Hello, I admit I have not followed last threads about cache and new infrastructure (plugins and stuff). Might suggest you take a look at the cache rewrite- it already has a sqlite backend in it, although that's not