Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] multiprocessing.eclass: Introduce get_nproc() to get no of CPUs

On 14/12/16 12:29, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 14-12-2016 13:01:16 -0500, Doug Freed wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Nathan Zachary >> <nathanzach...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> On 14/12/16 10:11, Doug Freed wrote: >>>>> I somehow doubt that would

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] multiprocessing.eclass: Introduce get_nproc() to get no of CPUs

On 14/12/16 10:11, Doug Freed wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Dec 2016 15:27:25 +0300 >> Andrew Savchenko wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 10:36:15 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: + nproc=$(python -c

Re: [gentoo-dev] Empty project: LXDE

ght weight replacement options, with a > wee bit of migration detail > > > hth, > James > I was under the impression that both LXDE and LXQT would continue development, but that LXQT would be favoured. Is there an official statement that LXDE is dead? Cheers, Nathan Zachary signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

ing GitHub. Though it is a great resource, I second the idea that Gentoo should offer the repository space in order to stay separate. Cheers, Nathan Zachary signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] amd64 and x32 systemd stages should be ready

s://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Archboot .. > looks like a potentially safer bet ? > +1. Arch would probably be the best choice for a systemd-based rescue disc. Cheers, Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.16 moving to ~arch

that the end result is something that benefits the community and distribution as a whole. Cheers, Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] news item: upgrading to postfix-2.9

environments, it is likely better to provide users with ample warning than to risk the application failing and troubleshooting thereafter. Cheers, Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo

On 24/08/10 22:21, Joshua Saddler wrote: On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:18:56 +0200 Christian Faulhammerfa...@gentoo.org wrote: Hi, Joshua Saddlernightmo...@gentoo.org: The big issue with the docs is that IF OpenRC/baselayout-2 are marked stable, it will require massive changes to hundreds of our

Re: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] recruitment process

On 05/04/10 11:07, Jon Portnoy wrote: On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 08:50:49AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote: Just replying randomly. On 05.04.2010 04:33, Tobias Heinlein wrote: I think this is a good starting point to get rid of the some important questions are too hard to answer dilemma that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

On 05/04/10 13:12, Ben de Groot wrote: After the mostly positive feedback on the recent wiki discussion, we have now gone ahead, formed a preliminary team consisting of both users and developers, and put up a project page [1]. All constructive feedback on this new project is welcome. We'd

Re: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki

for banning, etc. without closing the wiki up too much. Also, from what I could tell, this is how others are managing their wiki as well (Arch and Amarok, for example). Dror Levin I would enjoy working on a wiki as well as the fora, so I'm volunteering as well. --Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

of the tree. Attached to it could be a stabilisation day as well. --Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Remove cups from default profile to solve circular deps

. As we advance further toward a paperless computing experience, the need for printing support becomes even less. And, as it is incredibly simple to add print capabilities by placing the cups USE flag in /etc/make.conf, that choice should be left to the user. Regards, Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Remove cups from default profile to solve circular deps

advance further toward a paperless computing experience, the need for printing support becomes even less. And, as it is incredibly simple to add print capabilities by placing the cups USE flag in /etc/make.conf, that choice should be left to the user. Regards, Nathan Zachary One could

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

On 02/03/10 13:17, Ulrich Mueller wrote: On Tue, 02 Mar 2010, Sebastian Pipping wrote: To make naming a bit more consistent, how about: - BUGDAY-CANDIDATE - BUGDAY-ACCEPTED - BUGDAY-REFUSED They're a bit long but I think it's worth to not have them crippled down

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Marking bugs for bugday?

On 02/03/10 13:39, Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 03/02/10 20:28, Nathan Zachary wrote: This looks like overkill to me. One keyword should be enough, and for supplementary information Status Whiteboard could be used. I agree. Simply having the BUGDAY keyword should be sufficient

Re: [gentoo-dev] about a new app

at the source, I might be able to throw one together. The best thing for you to do now though is to file the bug. Hope that helps, Nathan Zachary

Re: [gentoo-dev] PR Project Activity Issues

excerpt from the thread i mentioned: Nathan Zachary ka...@gentoo.org wrote: I would be happy to help out with the newsletter, especially with the one article. So, see, people are willing to help with the content. Their prowess needs to be utilized

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: disable python and perl USE flags in profile

If one has built a system with the default python and perl USE flags, what steps would be necessary to remove all packages and dependencies after removing them from the USE declarations? Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: Dawid WgliDski wrote: On Monday 08 of December 2008 11:34:21 Maciej

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: disable python and perl USE flags in profile

to manually uninstall packages that no longer exist in the portage tree since it may not be possible to satisfy their dependencies. Also, be aware of the --with-bdeps option that is documented in `man emerge`. Thanks for the information Josh. Josh Saddler wrote: Nathan Zachary wrote: If one has