On 14 November 2012 05:13, Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
Alexis Ballier schrieb:
- considering gentoo generally uses e-prefixed names (econf, emake,
etc.) maybe its wiser to name the variables E17_* instead of only
E_*, or ENLIGHTENMENT_*, so that it makes the confusion harder.
Everything printed by ...
http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/genrdeps/rindex/xfce-base/libxfcegui4
... if not fixed already by an ~arch version needs a patch that ports it
from libxfcegui4 to libxfce4ui
These patches are available mainly at ...
http://bugzilla.xfce.org/ (anything submitted
Samuli Suominen wrote:
I'm just afraid our XFCE port gets lagged behind because of this as
compared to other distros ...
I am, as you know, a strong proponent of doing things right, rather
than doing them fast.
In this case that means that it is not the end of the world if Gentoo
ebuilds do
On 14/11/12 12:36, Peter Stuge wrote:
Samuli Suominen wrote:
I'm just afraid our XFCE port gets lagged behind because of this as
compared to other distros ...
I am, as you know, a strong proponent of doing things right, rather
than doing them fast.
In this case that means that it is not the
On 14/11/12 12:36, Peter Stuge wrote:
It also means that if I had strong interest in XFCE then I would work
on getting patches from other distribution upstream, so that Gentoo
did not need to have any patches at all.
I also want to clarify that *everything* we have for XFCE in gentoo-x86
now
Samuli Suominen wrote:
so unless you are willing to go that far as introducing yourself at the
xfce devel mailing list and accepting the mantle of upstream of them, we
are really stuck at this distribution level patching just like others
That makes no sense to me. If you (not you
On 11/14/2012 06:17 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
Samuli Suominen wrote:
so unless you are willing to go that far as introducing yourself at the
xfce devel mailing list and accepting the mantle of upstream of them, we
are really stuck at this distribution level patching just like others
That
tl;dr - please test dev-libs/icu-50.1-r2 and report if it works for you
or not; if it doesn't, please try dev-libs/icu-50.1-r1 and also report
I've done two version bumps of dev-libs/icu related to the c++11 bug
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=439892 (feel free to add the
package to the
On 14/11/2012 21:02, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
My _limited_ testing seems to indicate it's working. But if you people
can just do your tests, that would be most welcome. Please report back
either success or failure.
What kind of testing are you thinking of? Execution or build? And I
assume this
