On 10 July 2012 09:41, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/09/2012 06:11 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
So, seems like there is still room for improvement...
Aside from the obvious need to improve the portage behavior, we might
also want to consider enabling USE=icu by default in the profile.
On 10 July 2012 11:03, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Yup, this issue hit anybody who has qt-webkit and chromium installed.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is half of the entire userbase.
I would be.
We ran into another confusing icu-related issue with qt-core a few
weeks ago (bug
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:25 AM, Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 10 July 2012 11:03, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
You keep saying that, but do you have any actual data to back up
that claim? There is no doubt that Chromium is a mainstream and
popular package, but I doubt if
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:18 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:25 AM, Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 10 July 2012 11:03, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
You keep saying that, but do you have any actual data to back up
that claim? There is no
Hello, all.
Since nowadays udev is bundled within systemd, we start having two
libudev providers: =sys-apps/systemd-185 and sys-fs/udev. Making
the long story short, I would like to introduce a virtual for libudev
which would pull in either of those two.
There are three USE flags used in
DEP == Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu writes:
DEP To have a better support for Gentoo lxc guests, it would be nice if our
DEP default inittab contained a line for handling SIGPWR sent to PID 1 to
DEP shut the system down.
I'm embarrased to have to say that I hadn't noticed that
Il 10/07/2012 18:44, James Cloos ha scritto:
I'm embarrased to have to say that I hadn't noticed that gentoo lacked power
lines in its inittab(5).
They _are_ deprecated after all.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:18:00 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
The former two were previously provided by 'extras' USE flag,
and the third was unconditional.
since udev-171 seems to be going stable, why not simply drop the
'extras' compatibility ?
then you could just use 'gudev?'
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:54:31 -0400
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:18:00 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
The former two were previously provided by 'extras' USE flag,
and the third was unconditional.
since udev-171 seems to be going stable,
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 07:57:50PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:54:31 -0400
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:18:00 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
The former two were previously provided by 'extras' USE flag,
and the
All,
the last thread started by mgorny has prompted me to ask here on the
list which versions of udev we really need in the tree.
I know that all versions before 133 must go because openrc has a
requirement for at least that version.
I've looked at the kernel packages we have in /usr/portage,
Michał Górny schrieb:
Hello, all.
Since nowadays udev is bundled within systemd, we start having two
libudev providers: =sys-apps/systemd-185 and sys-fs/udev. Making
the long story short, I would like to introduce a virtual for libudev
which would pull in either of those two.
There are
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:18:00PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
Hello, all.
Since nowadays udev is bundled within systemd, we start having two
libudev providers: =sys-apps/systemd-185 and sys-fs/udev. Making
the long story short, I would like to introduce a virtual for libudev
which would
I've looked at the kernel packages we have in /usr/portage, but have no
guide there either. If I go by gentoo-sources, I could get rid of all
but very recent versions of udev, but I have heard some things also
about people using older kernels. Also, vanilla-sources goes all the way
back to
I've looked at the kernel packages we have in /usr/portage, but have no
guide there either. If I go by gentoo-sources, I could get rid of all
but very recent versions of udev, but I have heard some things also
about people using older kernels. Also, vanilla-sources goes all the way
back to
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
Just a few more packages that I'm no longer using or for which I no
longer have hardware or so on so forth. Yes I'm still cleaning this
stuff up.
Notes in brackets below a list.
* indicates a dependency of the
On 11 July 2012 02:30, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
All,
the last thread started by mgorny has prompted me to ask here on the
list which versions of udev we really need in the tree.
Personally, I'm holding on to 171. I have masked =181 because of
bad decisions upstream and I want
On 11 July 2012 03:23, Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
Michał Górny schrieb:
Hello, all.
Since nowadays udev is bundled within systemd, we start having two
libudev providers: =sys-apps/systemd-185 and sys-fs/udev. Making
the long story short, I would like to introduce a virtual for
18 matches
Mail list logo
