Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Developer retirement

2006-10-17 Thread Vlastimil Babka
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jakub Moc wrote: Harald van Dijk napsal(a): It's meant to be used when the user chooses to reply to the list. That is not necessarily the function of the Reply button. In mutt, and IIRC in Thunderbird as well, reply is intended to mean reply to

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Developer retirement

2006-10-17 Thread Duncan
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Mon, 16 Oct 2006 23:49:10 +0200: Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): What's so hard about paying attention when replying? What's so hard about making the behaviour consistent? What's so hard about configuring your client to

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Paul de Vrieze
Simon Stelling wrote: Paul de Vrieze wrote: I would go for the EAPI bump. Even then I think it would be smart to wait a short while for packages to use this as we ensure that the supporting portage version is stable. Err, EAPI was designed to assure that a supporting version is actually

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Paul de Vrieze
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 20:12:40 +0100 Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | As the default USE flags are metadata about the package (not the | profile), it makes sense to store that data in the ebuild, along with | the rest of the package's metadata. No no on. Default

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Paul de Vrieze
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | It's a stupid statement, not providing any further backing for your | position; please dear god spare us all the waste of time reading | your emails if that's how you're going to push for what you want... Not at all. Your argument could be rephrased like this: There

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Luca Barbato
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [rants] the IUSE=nocxx is that different than IUSE=+cxx ? the per ebuild defaults let you replace the ugly nofoo to +foo, archiving just the same. It is evaluated just only if there isn't anything before it (say make.conf and friends) So it doesn't look to me that

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Stephen Bennett
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:17:11 +0200 Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's a nonargument. But let me put it easier. Don't blame us when paludis made a design mistake and try to force that mistake on the rest of us. Instead fix paludis. What design mistake? And what the hell does

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Sebastian Bergmann
Stephen Bennett wrote: And what the hell does paludis have to do with this anyway? [ ] You get the meaning of analogy. No, this has nothing to do with anal. -- Sebastian Bergmann http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B

Re: [gentoo-dev] X.Org 7.1 is Stable

2006-10-17 Thread Caleb Cushing
I was running evdev under Xorg 7.0 and 7.1 for my mouse without problems. It works if you use it the way they intend it to use it. Read the man page. Otherwise yea it will crash. I used it under 7.0 fine but when I upgraded to 7.1 it started causing xorg to crash on startup same

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Stephen Bennett
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:23:23 +0200 Sebastian Bergmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen Bennett wrote: And what the hell does paludis have to do with this anyway? [ ] You get the meaning of analogy. No, this has nothing to do with anal. There is no analogy to be made there. Arguing

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Alec Warner
Stephen Bennett wrote: On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:23:23 +0200 Sebastian Bergmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen Bennett wrote: And what the hell does paludis have to do with this anyway? [ ] You get the meaning of analogy. No, this has nothing to do with anal. There is no analogy to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Stuart Herbert
On 10/17/06, Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is no analogy to be made there. Arguing against carrying profile metadata in IUSE is trying to prevent a design decision, not trying to work around one by forcing extra work on people. There seems to be very little support for your

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Alec Warner
Stephen Bennett wrote: On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 09:43:08 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Placing the default USE flags all in the profiles amounts to profile duplication where-ever you want to use the ebuilds - this is annoying. This is exactly why we have cascading profiles, no? So

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 07:30, Luca Barbato wrote: the IUSE=nocxx is that different than IUSE=+cxx ? that is where we want to move to So it doesn't look to me that problematic, am I missing something? the issue is that Ciaran wants all of the stuff to be in the profile rather than in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: per-package default USE flags

2006-10-17 Thread Chris White
On Friday 13 October 2006 18:40, Zac Medico wrote: Wow, this thread is pretty huge. Might wanna like.. take it to a council meeting or something in a medium (such as IRC) where message should be going back at forth at this sort of interval. Either that or just duke it out in a parking lot,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resurrecting Project Dolphin

2006-10-17 Thread Tomasz B Mloduchowski
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, Benjamin Judas wrote: Hello folks, I took the decision to reanimate Project Dolphin. Dolphin was an experimental minimal CD similar to Grmbl aimed at semi-professionals and professionals to help repair broken systems or minimize data-loss. Opposites to the official