On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
IAN DELANEY posted on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:55:16 +0800 as excerpted:
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (06 Jun 2013)
# Masked for removal in ~ 30 days. Upstream inactive dev-python/elixir
Where's the bug reference one would
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM, justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 16/11/12 09:48, Samuli Suominen wrote:
does this mean it puts the binary-only package, nvidia-cg-toolkit, to
the default search path when you call the linker (compiler)?
please don't do that, it is counterproductive with the
This outcome was just super. Systemd was bumped to -188 today. Udev is
still at -187. Instead of actually listening to upstream[1], which
would be easy with a virtual, we're now stuck with one part of the duo
being at one version and the other part of the duo another. And when I
login to X with
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 20:11:18 +0200
Peter Alfredsen peter.alfred...@gmail.com wrote:
This outcome was just super. Systemd was bumped to -188 today. Udev is
still at -187. Instead of actually listening to upstream[1], which
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:27:41 -0400
Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
Personally, I think a consolidated systemd/udev package is the best
way to go here.
A consolidated package means that:
- every change made by
On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 23:10:47 +0300
Timur Aydin t...@taydin.org wrote:
Today I have tried to merge openswan-2.4-14 into my ~x86 system. The
compilation failed because of a name clash:
Please attach your patch here:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=271987
We use bugzilla for bug
On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:56:06 +0200
Piotr Jaroszyński pe...@gentoo.org wrote:
I know gentoo has other problems too, but it's the new and
innovative stuff that makes working on Gentoo fun.
YES !
/loki_val
On Sun, 17 May 2009 22:54:38 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Peter Alfredsen
loki_...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:56:06 +0200
Piotr Jaroszyński pe...@gentoo.org wrote:
I know gentoo has other problems too, but it's the new
On Thu, 14 May 2009 22:03:22 +0200
Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
I concur that speaking for myself, I don't understand the issue. And
it looks like many others don't either. So if anyone wants to promote
this GLEP, their job is clear: make people understand what the issue
is here, and
On Wed, 6 May 2009 08:49:53 +0200
Christian Faulhammer fa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi,
any project lead/member can post an answer to this mail for a status
report:
Gentoo .NET progress
Currently doing good. Nothing much to report. Everything is shiny
and well-oiled. SVN ebuilds of trunk and
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:17:15 -0700
Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev
list to see.
Up or down vote on USE=static-libs. It seems it wasn't
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:21:55 -0400
Thomas Anderson gentoofa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why are we trying to get rid of static libraries again? I have not
seen any compelling reason to remove libraries that may be useful to
our users. Perhaps I've missed some discussion(in which case, I'd
love to
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:14:36 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:10:50 +0200
Peter Alfredsen loki_...@gentoo.org wrote:
A reasonable default would be --disable-static. Then libs that have
in-tree consumers of their static libs could then make
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 12:03:03 +0200
Rémi Cardona r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Could anyone actually give a good reason for slot operators? What
packages would have a _clear_ benefit from using them? I'm asking for
an actual list of packages, not just some package that may exist in a
parallel
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:29:53 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think the current way is the most easily-supportable way for us.
Complex interdependencies b/w packages and slots = O(n^k) times bugs,
where k = no. of slots for a library.
If we don't get all those bugs, it
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 17:06:47 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
So you're looking for ABI deps? @preserved-libs is the answer (C-sharp
support for that?). Suggested rebuilds upon upgrade? Separate issue,
separate solution (pkg_pretend maybe?)
@preserved-libs is a horrible hack
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:07:37 +0200
Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
Tiziano Müller schrieb:
With this, i would also like to see any
changes that need an EAPI to get into EAPI-3.
No. Won't happen.
Can you also explain your statement?
EAPI-3 is closed for new features. We want it
Paludis --info does not work for me. Plz2fix.
In particular, have a look at
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=262277#c4
Where both emerge --info and paludis --info is posted. Sometimes, more
is less.
While it may be useful to post all the information about the
package-manager for *you*,
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:40:14 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
No, an EAPI bump is necessary. Older (post-EAPI) Portage versions do
something different, so any ebuild relying upon particular behaviour
is already broken.
For an example of this, see
Hi,
This is an eclass that provides functionality needed to further split
poppler into its constituent libraries and utilities. The current way
of doing this, where we have poppler with utils in app-text/poppler and
the bindings for qt3, qt4 and glib in app-text/poppler-bindings is
suboptimal.
1)
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:34:01 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote:
Dne středa 25 Březen 2009 19:25:02 Peter Alfredsen napsal(a):
I will just pick parts with notes. Some of them apply on more
places :]
# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: HOMEPAGE
# @DESCRIPTION:
# HOMEPAGE is set to http
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:26:06 -0100
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
[...]
Saleem Abdulrasool (compnerd)
[...]
dev-dotnet/dbus-glib-sharp
dev-dotnet/dbus-sharp
[...]
Snatched
Since genstef has been .away for some time, I arranged with him that I'd
send a list of his ebuilds that need maintenance to be put up for grabs.
This list contains all ebuilds that have no herd, at least one open bug
and where genstef is the maintainer.
media-video/linux-uvc
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:37:12 +0100
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
To make our lives easier I would suggest deprecating EAPI0 and
migrating existing ebuilds over some time to EAPI1 or higher until
EAPI0 can be obsoleted at some point in the future.
I would set the start of deprecation
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 20:26:24 +
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
* src_test run unless RESTRICTed or explicitly disabled by the user
(bug 184812)
This one is not uncontroversial and will not go in a 'quick' EAPI I
think.
/loki_val
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:44:55 -0500
Doug Goldstein car...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm wondering what exactly is the harm in letting developers idle for
a while?
Nothing, as long as they don't pretend to be maintaining packages while
they idle. See compnerd and his tonne of system-packages for
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 04:01:36 +0200
Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm collecting ideas from the wider development and contributing
community on how to help maintainers and contributors get work done
quicker, or rephrased - how to get more done in the limited time we
have.
Something
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:21:23 +0200
Petteri Räty betelge...@gentoo.org wrote:
Let's try something new. I would like to get opinions from as many
people as possible about GLEP 55 and alternatives listed here in order
to get some idea what the general developer pool thinks.
[...]
I dislike GLEP
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:43:09 -0700
Steve Dibb bean...@gentoo.org wrote:
Plus, I don't really grasp the whole we have to source the whole
ebuild to know the EAPI version argument. It's one variable, in one
line. Can't a simple parser get that and go from there?
The problem is that its
+# Peter Alfredsen loki_...@gentoo.org (15 Feb 2009)
+# Masking for removal in 30 days.
+# Fails to build with gcc-4.3, bug 250712
+media-video/gephex
+
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 19:02:12 +0100
Santiago M. Mola coldw...@gentoo.org wrote:
media-sound/last-exit
*snatched*
+# Peter Alfredsen loki_...@gentoo.org (1 Feb 2009)
+# Masked for removal in 30 days. Old and unmaintained. Upstream is gone.
+# Does not work with current ipod-sharp versions, see 195746. This
+# removes half of its functionality.
+# Is faily, see bug 256473.
+media-sound/monopod
+
# Peter Alfredsen loki_...@gentoo.org (30 Jan 2009)
+# Nothing uses this anymore, depends on gtk-sharp:1
+# Masked for removal in 30 days.
+dev-dotnet/gtkgl-sharp
+
+# Peter Alfredsen loki_...@gentoo.org (30 Jan 2009)
+# No longer maintained upstream, depends on gtk-sharp:1
+# Masked for removal in 30 days.
+dev-dotnet/mcatalog
+
[Mike: This looks like your field of expertise]
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:47:50 +0100
Tobias Klausmann klaus...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi,
glibc 2.9 uses a different way to implement getaddrinfo() which
triggers a race condition in most (if not all) Netfilter
firewalls that use connection
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:04:28 +0200
Petteri Räty betelge...@gentoo.org wrote:
# @FUNCTION: go-mono_src_unpack
# @DESCRIPTION: Runs default()
go-mono_src_unpack() {
default
}
What's the point? The ones from base.eclass should be doing the same
thing as the default ones any way.
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:31:30 +0300
Peter Volkov p...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi Peter.
NO_MONO_DEPEND=(
dev-lang/mono
dev-dotnet/libgdiplus
dev-dotnet/gluezilla
)
Just curious. What are the reasons to use array here?
I try to use arrays as often as possible, so I don't have
Below is a copy of the eclass I intend to use for all apps from
go-mono.com (AKA mono-project.com). Pretty standard fare. The affected
ebuilds are:
www-apache/mod_mono
dev-dotnet/xsp
dev-dotnet/libgdiplus
dev-dotnet/gluezilla
dev-lang/mono
dev-lang/mono-basic
dev-util/mono-debugger
+# Peter Alfredsen loki_...@gentoo.org (20 Dec 2008)
+# Masked for removal in 30 days. Version that compiles with gcc-4.3
+# is not ready for stable ( bug 251566 ).
+# Upstream has abandoned it, alternatives such as gedit exist.
+app-editors/katoob
+
--
/PA
signature.asc
Description
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 23:52 Tue 25 Nov , Peter Alfredsen (loki_val) wrote:
loki_val08/11/25 23:52:04
Added:gtk-sharp-module.eclass
Log:
eclass required for gnome-sharp and gnome-desktop-sharp packages
Did I miss
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:42:07 +0100
Peter Alfredsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seems like a really strange strategy for checking whether a
certain item is in a list.
I disagree.
You do? Why do you think it's better than 'has
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 09:42 Wed 26 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
# Make selecting components configurable.
epatch ${WORKDIR}/${MY_P}-configurable.diff
This seems like
On Thursday 27 November 2008, Duncan wrote:
In that case, it may be better to do the limited code duplication,
given the relative permanence of eclasses.
So, what is it we're short of? Developer time or harddrive space? Is our
problem that our packages start to bitrot or that we have huge
On Friday 14 November 2008, Ryan Hill wrote:
[Snip more pie-in-the-sky]
Show me the code, please.
If you weren't interested in hearing differing opinions, then why did
you ask in the first place? :P
I just thought it sounded like a tall order, saying that fixing
libtool .la files
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
I heavily object to having any such function introduced or used or
equivalent .la removals conducted without a good rationale and
explanation of why this is the approach taken. I see no such
explanation anywhere, you are just blatantly
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 18:34 Sun 09 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
I've been told that .la files are really only needed on non-ELF
systems and with plugin systems that use dlopen.
And for people who want to build things statically.
That's true, but we
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote:
Le 12/11/2008 15:40, Peter Alfredsen a écrit :
But let me point out that in most leaf-packages, removing la files
will cause no pain, but will ensure that they do not have to be
rebuilt if a .la-listed dependency loses its .la file.
Mart
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
On K, 2008-11-12 at 15:40 +0100, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
It's a utility function. I've done all I can to ensure it'll be
used wisely. Whether it is used wisely is between you and ( $ROOT
or $666 ). But let me point out that in most leaf
On Sunday 02 November 2008, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
The attached patch for bug 238753 makes base.eclass support EAPI 2
functions.
Applied
--
/PA
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
I attach here a proposed new function for eutils.eclass. Review
requested. Thanks to zlin and igli for initial review and suggestions
on #gentoo-dev-help.
--
/PA
--- /usr/portage/eclass/eutils.eclass 2008-09-28 07:06:15.0 +0200
+++ eutils1.eclass 2008-11-06 22:22:51.0 +0100
@@
On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
+ # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la
files will be needed. + if type -P scanelf /dev/null
I think this is a not so cool way to check for an ELF system
On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
You could identify ELF a bit more reliable by running file on e.g.
${ROOT}/bin/bash, or just by building a list of CHOSTs that you
know are ELF systems.
D'oh, should have thought of that. See attached patch.
+ debug-print
On Wednesday 05 November 2008, Thomas Sachau wrote:
You should at least use emake instead of make in src_install. And i
would suggest to use something like this instead of the make install
line (maybe add some other default docs, if they are common):
if [ -f Makefile ] || [ -f GNUmakefile ]
On Monday 03 November 2008, Steve Long wrote:
Peter Alfredsen wrote:
debug-print-function $FUNCNAME $*
You should be using $@ not unquoted $*.
Fixed. Also fixed base_src_unpack and base_src_compile calling their
grunt functions with $1, when clearly it should have been [EMAIL PROTECTED
# @MAINTAINER:
-# ???
+# Peter Alfredsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#
# Original author Dan Armak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# @BLURB: The base eclass defines some default functions and variables.
# @DESCRIPTION:
# The base eclass defines some default functions and variables. Nearly
# everything else inherits from
On Sunday 02 November 2008, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
[...]
Please just imagine that this is added to the end of the patch:
-
-EXPORT_FUNCTIONS src_unpack src_compile src_install
/me had started hacking on this in-tree, and the first change was
removing that line.
--
/PA
signature.asc
/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/eclass/base.eclass,v 1.34 2008/07/17 09:49:14 pva Exp $
# @ECLASS: base.eclass
# @MAINTAINER:
-# ???
+# Peter Alfredsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#
# Original author Dan Armak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# @BLURB: The base eclass defines some default functions and variables.
# @DESCRIPTION
On Thursday 28 August 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
[poppler-0.8 stabilization]
Is 0.8 needed by something? We could also wait for Portage-2.2 and
preserved-libs.
It's all-round better than 0.6.3, which is from December 2007.
epdfviewer, evince and a bunch of other stuff uses it to render pdfs
Hi,
It won't be long before I ask for poppler-0.8 and -bindings to be
stabilized. This will bump the soname for poppler and force a rebuild
of all packages depending on it. I've opened a tracker bug at
http://bugs.gentoo.org/235897 where you can add a comment or place a
blocker bug if you want
On Sunday 20 July 2008, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:19:10AM +, Peter Alfredsen (loki_val)
wrote:
loki_val08/07/20 10:19:10
Modified: openldap-2.4.7.ebuild
openldap-2.4.10.ebuild openldap-2.3.41.ebuild
Log:
Propagate fix for glibc-2.8
On Monday 30 June 2008, Michael Hammer wrote:
* Jeremy Olexa [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080630 19:53]:
[...] IMO, b-w'ing is something that anyone can do.
s/can/should ? I mean bug wrangling is a very important thing
especially in the sight of users. I'm really willing to help on
b-w'ing if it
On Saturday 31 May 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 31 May 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
ive made this shift in profiles.desc:
sed -ir '/^(arm|s390|sh)/s:stable:dev:' profiles.desc
if/when we get dedicated arch maintainers, they can think about
shifting back
for the confused ...
On Thursday 10 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Also, you'll have to provide a URL to said change. i havent seen a
patch for it in my random driftings on the interweb.
-mike
I was just researching the issue, so had this handy:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg00417.html
--
/PA
On Monday 15 October 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
einfo
einfo Compile dev-libs/boost with USE=threads or
USE=threads-only
einfo if you want threading support for btg
einfo
Shouldn't that be threadsonly ?
64 matches
Mail list logo
