[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eclass/gstreamer.eclass: drop ltprune inherit

2021-07-26 Thread Conrad Kostecki
Dropping ltprune eclass and replacing it with a simple find command, as suggested alternatively. Signed-off-by: Conrad Kostecki --- eclass/gstreamer.eclass | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/eclass/gstreamer.eclass b/eclass/gstreamer.eclass index

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] eclass/eutils.eclass: drop ltprune inherit

2021-07-26 Thread Conrad Kostecki
No ebuilds remaining to call directly prune_libtool_files, so we could drop the ltprune inherit in eutils. Signed-off-by: Conrad Kostecki --- eclass/eutils.eclass | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/eclass/eutils.eclass b/eclass/eutils.eclass index

Re: [gentoo-dev] Guarantees of unstable architectures

2021-07-26 Thread Michał Górny
On Mon, 2021-07-26 at 17:23 +0100, Marek Szuba wrote: > Dear everyone, > > During the open-floor part of this month's Council meeting I asked > whether there is any official policy regarding what is or is not > guaranteed for hardware architectures we do not consider stable in > Gentoo. For

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3 5/5] check-reqs.eclass: Introduce CHECKREQS_DONOTHING

2021-07-26 Thread Andreas Sturmlechner
Replacement for I_KNOW_WHAT_I_AM_DOING with backwards compatibility. Signed-off-by: Andreas Sturmlechner --- eclass/check-reqs.eclass | 14 +++--- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/eclass/check-reqs.eclass b/eclass/check-reqs.eclass index

Re: [gentoo-dev] Guarantees of unstable architectures

2021-07-26 Thread Alexey Sokolov
26.07.2021 17:23, Marek Szuba пишет: > Dear everyone, > > During the open-floor part of this month's Council meeting I asked > whether there is any official policy regarding what is or is not > guaranteed for hardware architectures we do not consider stable in > Gentoo. For reference, according

[gentoo-dev] Guarantees of unstable architectures

2021-07-26 Thread Marek Szuba
Dear everyone, During the open-floor part of this month's Council meeting I asked whether there is any official policy regarding what is or is not guaranteed for hardware architectures we do not consider stable in Gentoo. For reference, according to the current version of

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Removing SHA512 hash from Manifests

2021-07-26 Thread Thomas Deutschmann
On 2021-07-25 08:27, Michał Górny wrote: On Sun, 2021-07-25 at 01:12 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: I don't understand. Isn't it the same motion we put down just 2 months ago [1]? Or is this something new? If this isn't something new, what has changed since May [2]? Apparently it has not

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] Add deblob support only for python3

2021-07-26 Thread Joshua Kinard
On 7/25/2021 19:19, Sam James wrote: > > >> On 22 Jul 2021, at 16:00, Alice wrote: >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Alice Ferrazzi >> --- >> eclass/kernel-2.eclass | 13 + >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > Alice, thanks for taking the initiative to get this done and