Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 07:00:30 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > > - Have a separate anyvimishthing directory, and make both vim and > > neovim look there, and only make plugins that have been tested to > > work with both install to that directory. > > ...and then vimthreesome for

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

On śro, 2017-05-31 at 23:54 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 02:32:24 +0700 > "Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" wrote: > > - implementing "nvim-syntax" (and `app-nvim/*`?) and duplicate all > > the installed files > > > > - patching NeoVim source to include Vim's

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

On 05/31/2017 03:54 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 02:32:24 +0700 > "Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" wrote: >> - implementing "nvim-syntax" (and `app-nvim/*`?) and duplicate all >> the installed files >> >> - patching NeoVim source to include Vim's runtimedirs (incl.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

On Wed, 31 May 2017 23:54:59 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > - Have a separate anyvimishthing directory, and make both vim and > neovim look there, and only make plugins that have been tested to work > with both install to that directory. +1 pgpmXJgzQwGtk.pgp

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] meson.eclass: implement basic cross-compiler support

This has been pushed.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 02:32:24 +0700 "Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" wrote: > - implementing "nvim-syntax" (and `app-nvim/*`?) and duplicate all > the installed files > > - patching NeoVim source to include Vim's runtimedirs (incl. "after" > dir), // NeoVim upstream highly disagree

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 21:02:24 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > No, it can't. That's the whole point. The algorithm must be defined so > that it is always predictable independently of order So what's this mysterious algorithm then? -- Ciaran McCreesh

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

Hi. On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: > Currently, we have a situation, that there are two Vim's: "old" one (vim8) and > NeoVim... Unfortunately, both of them have different runtimedirs... > > ... NeoVim supports Vim's plugins/scripts very well

Re: [gentoo-dev] [rfc] dev-libs/expat[unicode] and dev-libs/libbsd dependency

Hi, On 31.05.2017 21:16, Michał Górny wrote: >> How do you evaluate these options: >> >> a) Keep libexpatu.so + change libexpatw.so to CPPFLAGS=-DXML_UNICODE >> >> b) Drop libexpatu.so + change libexpatw.so to CPPFLAGS=-DXML_UNICODE > > Does any other distribution use libexpatu.so? If not,

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] NeoVim and vim-syntax

Currently, we have a situation, that there are two Vim's: "old" one (vim8) and NeoVim (for those who do not know: a fork of Vim with much and much more clean code, many neat features and so on). Unfortunately, both of them have different runtimedirs: XDG ones for NeoVim and the ones you know

Re: [gentoo-dev] [rfc] dev-libs/expat[unicode] and dev-libs/libbsd dependency

On śro, 2017-05-31 at 14:19 +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Hi! > > > The next release of dev-libs/expat is not far away and there are two > things that I would appreciate input with, before the next bump in Gentoo: > > > -DXML_UNICODE_WCHAR_T issues and Gentoo/Debian mismatch >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On śro, 2017-05-31 at 19:39 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > Again, you *need* to process the constraints in order. '!a? > > > ( b ) !b? ( a )' is not deterministic when none of a and b are > > > enabled otherwise. > > > > You can't rely on any particular order of constraints, especially

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 15:04:52 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 10:38 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > What if I specifically set USE=-bar in make.conf ? Do we really > > > > want PM to override that without telling me ? > > > > > > Yes. Unless you

[gentoo-dev] Items for Council Agenda, June 11

Hi everyone, The Gentoo Council will be meeting in two weeks. If anyone has any issues we need to discuss, please let me know and I'll put it on the agenda. Thanks. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On śro, 2017-05-31 at 10:38 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > What if I specifically set USE=-bar in make.conf ? Do we really > > > want PM to override that without telling me ? > > > > Yes. Unless you specifically and explicitly disable that (globally or > > for USE=bar), in which case the PM

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

Alexis Ballier posted on Wed, 31 May 2017 09:32:57 +0200 as excerpted: >> For example: >> >> foo? ( bar ) >> >> would mean 'if you have USE=foo, then USE=bar is enabled as well'. Not >> 'find some random solution which satisfies this'. In other words, here >> changing USE=foo into USE=-foo is

[gentoo-dev] [rfc] dev-libs/expat[unicode] and dev-libs/libbsd dependency

Hi! The next release of dev-libs/expat is not far away and there are two things that I would appreciate input with, before the next bump in Gentoo: -DXML_UNICODE_WCHAR_T issues and Gentoo/Debian mismatch === With USE=unicode, on Gentoo two

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 10:03:12 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 09:32 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > On wto, 2017-05-30 at 20:46 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On śro, 2017-05-31 at 09:32 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > > On wto, 2017-05-30 at 20:46 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 May 2017 20:11:38 +0200 > > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > [...]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:54:56 +0200 Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:51:33 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:35:04 +0200 > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 08:24

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:51:33 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:35:04 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 08:24 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > > > Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:35:04 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 08:24 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > For example: > > > > > > foo? ( bar ) > > > > > > would mean 'if you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On śro, 2017-05-31 at 08:24 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > For example: > > > > foo? ( bar ) > > > > would mean 'if you have USE=foo, then USE=bar is enabled as well'. > > What about "if bar cannot be enabled,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:24:20 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > For example: > > > > foo? ( bar ) > > > > would mean 'if you have USE=foo, then USE=bar is enabled as well'. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On wto, 2017-05-30 at 20:46 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Tue, 30 May 2017 20:11:38 +0200 > > Michał Górny wrote: > > [...] > > > > > Of course, we could just validate all the possible cases

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > For example: > > foo? ( bar ) > > would mean 'if you have USE=foo, then USE=bar is enabled as well'. What about "if bar cannot be enabled, then turn foo off"? -- Ciaran McCreesh

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On wto, 2017-05-30 at 20:46 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Tue, 30 May 2017 20:11:38 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > [...] > > > > Of course, we could just validate all the possible cases via > > > > repoman, and reject the ebuild if there's at least one conflict > > > >