28.2.2006, 19:39:15, Mike Frysinger wrote:
snip ewarn This ebuild overrides the default SLOT behaviour for
webapps ewarn If this package installs files into the htdocs dir, this
is ewarn probably a bug in the ebuild. /snip
Sigh... what kind of QA issue is that?
which part dont you
28.2.2006, 20:59:42, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 12:51, Renat Lumpau wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 05:11:57PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
And it sticks out a nasty ewarn and says that the ebuild is probably
broken.
Which it _probably_ is. See, this is a numbers
28.2.2006, 21:39:43, Mike Frysinger wrote:
whats your point ? if an ebuild author wants to control the SLOT, then
they should be able to without having an invalid warning issued on the
subject
considering the nature of the warning, it should be trivial to make it into a
proper QA check by
1.3.2006, 1:40:53, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 19:28, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:13:57 -0600 Lance Albertson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| I should note that if are a Gentoo Developer and have
| problems/concerns/issues with Ciaran's attitude/actions,
28.2.2006, 16:31:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:17:20 +0100 Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Tuesday 28 February 2006 15:52, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Yes, it's an utterly trivial problem, but it is a QA violation.
| Getting a complete list is something that
28.2.2006, 16:29:10, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:08:05 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| 28.2.2006, 15:39:40, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:49:13 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| wrote:
| | No, that's not a policy document, ebuild policy
.
TIA.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpJ6oWCjQowX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
are going to assault someone.
Thanks.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpm1h2ln0Bno.pgp
/show_bug.cgi?id=122993
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpCqeLfgkccp.pgp
Description
16.2.2006, 22:05:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 21:51:40 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Unless someone picks this up, it should be package.masked and
| removed from portage. There are tons of better and working
| alternatives.
Uh, it's not a last rites unless
16.2.2006, 22:47:49, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 22:32:13 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| BTW, x11-misc/bbapm is about one month
| overdue (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20201)
It's not overdue. It hasn't had a proper last rites email sent out yet
16.2.2006, 23:08:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 22:55:33 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| 16.2.2006, 22:47:49, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 22:32:13 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| wrote:
| | BTW, x11-misc/bbapm is about one month
| | overdue
16.2.2006, 23:58:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:45:45 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| OMG, stop this crap and don't waste our time. You specifically asked
| me to do it - http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20201#c11
No, I asked you to do it properly
17.2.2006, 0:23:49, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 00:14:42 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| 16.2.2006, 23:58:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
|
| What are you talking about? commonbox is listed as maintainer of that
| stuff, it's been broken for years, you neither fixed
17.2.2006, 0:42:13, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
(ommited)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/DoNotFeedTroll.jpg
Everyone else, sorry that you had to read this debate... :/
--
jakub
pgpDXBRuHXpDD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
/show_bug.cgi?id=106560
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpnufdngyRGw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
. The same
is true for python and ruby APIs.
Will be package.masked today and removed from portage in two weeks unless
someone has a very good reason to keep it and want to rewrite it from
scratch. See Bug 60472.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http
10.2.2006, 14:56:58, Olivier Crete wrote:
On Fri, 2006-10-02 at 10:33 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
Otherwise, I suggest to p.mask this in two weeks and then remove from
portage.
Is there any other useful gtk ldap browser in the tree ?
Not that I would know... Anyway, nls can be fixed by using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
10.2.2006, 20:03:45, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Olivier Crete wrote:
Is there any other useful gtk ldap browser in the tree ?
There's a bug for LAT -- http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=86854 --
but the current assignee apparently doesn't want
for other ebuilds to depend on a specific slotted mysql version,
e.g. if something doesn't work with 5.x but works just fine with 4.1. That
won't be possible once multislot use flag is required for slotted install.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http
in another mail,
maintaining lists of honored LINGUAS in each ebuild it just huge maintenance
overhead with no gain...
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1
=revdepfield0-0-2=short_desctype0-0-2=substringvalue0-0-2=revdepfield0-0-3=status_whiteboardtype0-0-3=substringvalue0-0-3=revdep
Eh???
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint
.
NOT until use-based deps are in place, plzktnxbye!!! Don't break the damned
realplayer thing again.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD
by default, that's not something that should be
considered until GLEP 42 or an equivalent solution gets implemented.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B
,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpcIGWOQtg0m.pgp
Description: PGP signature
29.12.2005, 14:20:37, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 29 December 2005 08:06, Jakub Moc wrote:
Maybe you could rather have used those 5 minutes you had spent writing your
mail to fix horde ebuilds/eclass instead. They have been broken with
dev-lang/php ever since it came into portage. :P
the eclass causing the failure, not the ebuild. Again,
what's the point? How will it work with FEATURES=nodoc? Why should an
ebuild ever fail just because some doc file is missing or got renamed or
whatever?
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net
26.12.2005, 14:28:12, Jason Stubbs wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 20:01, Jakub Moc wrote:
Currently there are quite a few ebuilds in the tree that execute dodoc
or dohtml for files that do not exist. I think it would be nice to have
ebuilds die if this is the case. To not break current
description... and this has caused tons
of cups depends on X bugs.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still
26.12.2005, 18:07:45, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:57:17 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| alsa - this does not make most sense definitely, this horrible thing
| needs to die.
Why? On x86, alsa is the least broken sound system, and on x86, the
target
26.12.2005, 19:36:23, Joe McCann wrote:
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 17:57 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
eds - please, fix the ebuilds properly instead of throwing the thing on
everyone. This has already caused numerous invalid bugs with people
wondering why the heck portage wants to emerge gnome
26.12.2005, 22:21:14, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petteno wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 20:24, Jakub Moc wrote:
exactly the same thing with motif - would
someone explain why the heck do do we need this thing in make.defaults?
Because people emerges xpdf waiting for xpdf binary and they won't find
,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpLILkpRpuBF.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Rewrite from scratch, that's what left here. So much you get if you start
with a bullshit license originally and then go MIA. :/
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7
pointless.
Copyright *does* matter, if you want to see an example how a ridiculous
license kills the job, go see qmail ebuilds.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C
Hello here,
the virtual/ thingy broke the deptree again with virtual/libstdc++ (see Bug
116253), essentially the same issue like with virtual/x11. These virtuals
need to go straight stable if any of their RDEPEND atoms is stable for a
particular arch.
Betelgeuse is working on a repoman check for
14.12.2005, 18:12:05, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
And for the network challenged, output in local time:
And for the bandwidth/time-challenged, who do not wish to waste their time
reading useless emails:
:0:
* ^From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
/dev/null
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL
10.12.2005, 11:09:50, Bryan �stergaard wrote:
Added to the menagerie are 3 fish, 2 bird and a hamster.
Hey, so that was you who stole jforman's hamsters during bugzie upgrade and
broke the thing? :P
Welcome... ;)
--
jakub
pgp3AC7XoWZMa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
still not fixed.
Whenever I try 3.4.4 I can't rebuild glibc because of this bug.
Sure. So remove USE=vanilla from your use flags and it will work. That bug
won't be fixed, because it's not a bug.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net
1.12.2005, 0:29:48, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 17:34 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
Ordinarily, I upgrade packages individually when it seems appropriate
never do 'emerge world' with or without '-e' or other flags;
I do 'esync' every weekend look at what is marked as having
1.12.2005, 1:30:41, Marien Zwart wrote:
Not sure if everyone is aware of this, but most installed pythons link to
libstdc++.so. This is not a problem if you run the above revdep-rebuild (it
should catch it just fine). It is a problem if you get rid of gcc 3.3 before
installing libstdc++-v3
27.11.2005, 15:39:48, Jason Stubbs wrote:
On Sunday 27 November 2005 22:09, Ned Ludd wrote:
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 07:58 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 12:46 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
Except that no{man,info,doc} are on the to-die list anyway.
They are very valuable
to portage. docbook-sgml-utils co. is extremely fragile and buggy thing.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still
of the design. Better stick w/ the current
one in that case. :-(
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
23.11.2005, 11:25:58, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 01:55, Jakub Moc wrote:
emerge -e world emerge -e world emerge depclean
You've missed revdep-rebuild to fix the borkage that emerge depclean
produced. ;)
After double rebuilding of the complete world I would
23.11.2005, 20:07:15, Dan Meltzer wrote:
Can we get all current developers renamed to nick.developer then? just
to alleiviate any confusion someone may have...
[snip a buttload or two]
NO (I sincerely hope at least), and please let's finally stop messing w/ email
addresses causing further
than either you or I have been around.
I can't speak for others, but personally I'm not interested in receiving such
crap in my mailbox. There's enough traffic here as it is. Please, keep on topic
or go chat elsewhere.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http
22.11.2005, 17:30:50, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 09:54 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
Also, the problem is not so much needing manpower for testing as far as
Release Engineering is concerned. It is instead having some method in
place where devs actually perform QA on
22.11.2005, 18:51:12, Simon Stelling wrote:
Harald van D?k wrote:
(Note that I'm not going to argue either way whether this is a good
thing; I'm merely pointing out that the docs do say we're about choice.)
You still can choose between stage3 and stage3+GRP without having to do
anything
22.11.2005, 19:03:49, Grant Goodyear wrote:
I keep hearing this, isn't there a real difference between a stage 1 and a
stage 3 install inasmuch as somebody who needs (or wants) to dramatically
tailor what's in the system profile can choose to do so from a stage 1 or 2,
but would have to
22.11.2005, 19:13:36, Danny van Dyk wrote:
Thomas Kirchner schrieb: | I'm against this change, personally. Stage1 has
*always* been for | advanced users. If someone screws up their own system
(which is possible | in any number of other ways, as well) then it's their
fault. Gentoo | isn't
22.11.2005, 20:57:15, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
The idea was to move out the stage1/stage2 docs to somewhere else. Then
create some sort of Advanced Installation Topics guide or something, to
list out the replacement procedures for customizing a system from a stage3
tarball, then, eventually,
22.11.2005, 21:58:50, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
That FAQ section has nothing in common with the original stage1 docs. Sorry,
installing stage3 to remove all the use flags cruft subsequently, bootstrap
and re-emerge the system and then ponder which packages are not needed any
more (again,
23.11.2005, 0:26:03, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
However, Gentoo still provides stage1 and stage2 tarballs. This is for
development purposes (the Release Engineering team starts from a stage1
tarball to obtain a stage3) but shouldn't be used by users: a stage3 tarball
can very well be used to
illustrative pics accompanying them, but that's just me. ;)
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
21.11.2005, 14:22:39, Herbert G. Fischer wrote:
Hi,
I'm looking forward to use Bacula 1.38.1 that was released last week but
not even 1.38.0 that was released 31 october 2005 has an ebuild yet. There is
some problem with it? It's abandoned?
Please let me know if you need help on this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
21.11.2005, 20:16:47, Renat Golubchyk wrote:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 01:37:00 -0600 Lance Albertson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Variable names and commands are bright blue in the old docs. The new
color is darker and that does not improve readability
of flexing muscles
and ego in endless debates on importance of subdomains creating pointless
administrative overhead, someone *please* with sugar on top drop that idea from
the GLEP.
This debate starts to be pretty much ridiculous.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG
19.11.2005, 5:30:35, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Testing ebuilds when keywording/marking stable is supposed to be
mandatory and such stuff does not belong into changelogs.
Sorry, but that's a big no. People that add/remove keywords without
making note in the Changelog deserve a massive kick
19.11.2005, 10:31:23, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Corey Shields wrote:
Before deciding on such proposals, it might be also wise to consult infra
people who'll have to implement and maintain such things, IMHO. And, how
exactly will be people having multiple roles handled here - still missing a
clear
stuff in there. It gains nothing, just confuses people and breaks
things.
Thanks.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
18.11.2005, 16:33:08, Jakub Moc wrote:
- rendering /etc/portage/package.keywords useless (install a dep for one
particular ebuild and enjoy the USE flag enabled globally) - causing unwanted
results (I did not really install app-text/recode for the purpose of enabling
Err, /etc/portage
18.11.2005, 16:43:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
i see no reason to keep use.defaults around anymore, i think the rest of our
config/profile system covers for it adequately and in a manner that doesnt
confused people
Also, IIRC, saner alternatives have been suggested, like IUSE=+bleh to enable
a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
18.11.2005, 20:18:58, Drake Wyrm wrote:
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I don't think so... If I want to enable a feature for one
specific ebuild and a USE flag in /etc/portage/package.use pulls in a
dep, that in turn enables that use
in metadata.xml for the ebuilds that you are
maintaining (to name a few: qt, secure-tunneling or comm-fax is NOT an existing
alias on bugzilla).
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint
... there are about
200 more or less active Gentoo devs around and the last thing I need is to
ponder upon what project/role that particular person is on. What's the benefit?
:/
Please, don't introduce such PITA.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu
19.11.2005, 1:07:40, Homer Parker wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-18 at 23:29 +, Kurt Lieber wrote:
There is no technical reason why any of this is necessary and it
doesn't
provide any tangible benefits that I can see. If a user really wants
to
know someone's role within the project, they can
19.11.2005, 1:38:03, Grant Goodyear wrote:
Incidentally, the benefit is to make users who are actively helping Gentoo
feel like they're part of the family. It was decided that a straight
@gentoo.org address would be confusing, though, since most people associate
those addresses with
19.11.2005, 3:07:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Sure, recognise their contributions, by giving them credit in ChangeLogs.
How exactly does testing stuff fit into *changelogs*, have I missed something?
--
jakub
pgpd4At0gxKS4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
19.11.2005, 3:49:46, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 03:27:13 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| 19.11.2005, 3:07:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Sure, recognise their contributions, by giving them credit in
| ChangeLogs.
|
| How exactly does testing stuff fit
7.11.2005, 20:11:23, Grobian wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:32:38 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| So, what list should the user that wants to receive those
| **important** messages sign up to?
That's your first misconception right there. Most users don't
to display upgrade
messages when running emerge -uDav world...
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
mail via cron might be
a nice optional feature for those who want to use it.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still
amount of
time and does not follow the destiny of einfo/ewarn logging (3 years and
counting).
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA
1.11.2005, 18:04:08, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
On Monday 31 October 2005 22:44, Petteri Räty wrote:
Checked the bugzilla and the two open bugs seem to be version bumps. I
think the policy is not to remove working ebuilds from the tree although
they are not maintained by anyone.
It's not policy
USE flags at all...
These three no* flags should have been killed ages ago. They've never been
useful for anything else than causing tons of PEBKAC bugs. :-( This stuff is
not optional, period.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks
:
svn: PROPFIND request failed on '/svn/java/gentoo-java-experimental'
svn: PROPFIND of '/svn/java/gentoo-java-experimental': SSL negotiation failed:
SSL error: unknown protocol (https://gentooexperimental.org)
H?
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http
-core due to the constant
flames...
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgp6BGNdGDmp5.pgp
11.10.2005, 10:52:35, Jan Kundrát wrote:
On Tuesday 11 of October 2005 10:47 Jakub Moc wrote:
Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or whatever it
would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due to the constant
flames...
Nothing, of course. But how would you
failed then the
ebuild should just die, no?
I just don't feel like recompiling it again :)
Cheers, Ferdy
No, the ebuild does not die, there are things known to be broken in those
tests. About 10-15 tests always fail, IIRC. Otherwise, it's Bug 59337.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL
logging out into seperate
files like most distro's do.
What about this one?
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/security/security-handbook.xml?part=1chap=3#doc_chap4
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
category would the particular ebuild fit).
*shrug*
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
already managed to delete all the bugspam this caused... *g*
But yeah, it's good for some rough orientation, at least blah-?/ebuild if
unsure.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint
13.9.2005, 21:08:43, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 20:57:24 +0200 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Sure, I've already managed to delete all the bugspam this caused...
| *g*
Yeah, maintainer-wanted bug emails are a pain in the ass. How about we
turn off email sending
really, considering there are over 600 new
ebuild bugs there.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
to
maintain them, he can focus more on testing the actual app then fixing a broken
ebuild (or even committing a broken ebuild into the tree).
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint
the last maintainer is removed from metadata.xml?
Well i announced these packages on -dev. Now i can wait some time (how
long?) and then?
Put maintainer-needed in herd seems a logical solution to me. Hmmm. Maybe I
missed something?
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature
get into portage *much* faster
then all those months in p.mask.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
the user base is not that large.
I don't know why this ebuild should be dropped, I have much better candidates
for removal - such as y-windows ;p
All the bugs are trivial and half of them is solved in 0.30.3 which could be
marked stable.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgpVunBjgQcyH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
=nostrip ? :)
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgp1U3v1QCSuL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
301 - 391 of 391 matches
Mail list logo
