Someone end the bikeshed train please.
Seconded.
On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 21:11 +0200, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 08 Jul 2015, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jul 2015 20:07:34 +0200
Tobias Klausmann klaus...@gentoo.org wrote:
In essence, assuming we can just scale to make CI work is
ignoring the matter of the slower archs.
On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 14:10 +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
On 20:57 Sat 24 Jan , Tom Gall wrote:
Hi All,
This is sort of a CFP in some ways but not quite that formal. I’ve been
throttled back on arm64 for a bit as the hardware I’ve had access to has
all been painfully remote and
On Wed, 2014-06-25 at 22:42 -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
alexxy added it more than a year ago to the tree as part of the x11
herd, of which he isn't a maintainer. It hasn't been really seen any
attention and is broken with current versions of Mesa. I've pinged him
multiple times to see if he's
On Mon, 2014-06-16 at 13:37 +, hasufell wrote:
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn:
hasufell schrieb:
No improvements so far. I am going to hardmask sys-devel/crossdev,
unless someone can explain why we are still in broken stage.
More packages are popping up that randomly break. Recent
On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 18:43 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
I find this useless at this time because the work is in-progress, but in
order to silence the loud minority,
please review the news item.
Thanks!
- Samuli
I appreciate your work on this - and you may call them the loud
On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 10:09 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
I don't know how much chromium is built and tested on lesser-used
arches (ie: arm, hppa, ia64, etc), but if there are dev's that try and
maintain these keywords that aren't in the team, it might be a good
idea to leave src_test in
On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 10:31 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
I think using INSTALL_MASK to kill a few inodes that probably don't
even have extents using a sledgehammer to kill a fly, and if you put
some holes in your walls in the process I_TOLD_YOU_SO. However, I
won't tell people they can't do
On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 19:32 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 07:09:08PM -0600, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
I'm not exactly a fan of systemd, though I know it has some uses, and
I'm still curious as to why it installs/stores *configuration* data
in /lib - if only from
On Fri, 2014-02-28 at 19:18 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 28/02/14 19:01, Lars Wendler wrote:
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 16:41:23 +0200 Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 28/02/14 16:41, Lars Wendler wrote:
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:28:30 +0200 Samuli Suominen wrote:
It would be very helpful if
On Tue, 2014-02-25 at 10:43 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Here is a bit better worded news item for the upgrade. I think I've
taken into account any concerns, but please check
the grammar part. Thanks!
- Samuli
CONFIG_DMIID isn't available for ARM. Can we make that warning go away
if on
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 07:32 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
If it's okay, I'd want to post this fast, before adding KEYWORDS to
sys-fs/udev-209's ebuild
SHOULD or NEEDS TO BE ? Honestly, this didn't read like much of a news
announcement at all, and reads more like something I'd write when I
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 10:40 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 20/02/14 09:44, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 07:55 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 20/02/14 00:23, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Following up to today's QA meeting: The gtk3 USE flag is used by
27 packages, so I
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 09:11 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2014-02-20, o godz. 01:44:17
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 07:55 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 20/02/14 00:23, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Following up to today's QA meeting: The gtk3 USE
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 03:59 -0500, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
And this is an example of why everyone on the gnome team doesn't like
the gtk3 flag. Because well-meaning developers will be looking at
their one corner of the portage tree, deciding that they are going to
handle the choice of gtk
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 07:55 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 20/02/14 00:23, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Following up to today's QA meeting: The gtk3 USE flag is used by
27 packages, so I suggest making it a global flag:
gtk3 - Add support for x11-libs/gtk+ (The GIMP Toolkit) version 3
On Sun, 2014-02-16 at 09:03 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, keeping the bugs assigned to package maintainers will still allow
them to try to get that pending bugs fixed (or resolved in some way) as
they will take care
Against my better judgment...
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 05:55 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 21:15:47 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 02:48 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:35:22 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 05:52 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
You know what - this is pure and utter bullshit. Keeping it around for
slower arches does NOT block progress. I have intimate knowledge with
what ACTUALLY
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 13:58 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Can we do something about our growing queue when fixing is insufficient?
https://bugs.gentoo.org/chart.cgi?category=-All-datefrom=dateto=label0=All%20Openline0=320name=320subcategory=-All-action=wrap
PS: As a bonus, here's a nice view of
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 01:08 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
The -* keyword is special. It is used to indicate package versions
which are not worth trying to test on unlisted archs. [1]
You can keep rehashing about winning, but all it does is break policy.
[1]:
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 02:07 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 18:23:28 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 01:08 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
The -* keyword is special. It is used to indicate package versions
which are not worth trying
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 02:48 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:35:22 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
Alright, well, I've tried my best, I give up. Instead of having
something working we should just remove ebuilds of working packages.
s/should/could/ s
On Wed, 2014-01-29 at 03:15 +, Duncan wrote:
Tom Wijsman posted on Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:11:48 +0100 as excerpted:
[Seven J. Long wrote...]
There's plenty of ways to stay on the bleeding-edge; throwing out the
baby with the bathwater will only tip you over it, and bork the distro
for
On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 09:52 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's not necessarily the STABLEREQs stopping, some of the issues are (at
least on some arches!) that some of the unstable software doesn't quite
work properly
On Sun, 2014-01-26 at 21:00 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
Hi again.
If someone is interested in the results of my tests and benchmarks,
I've uploaded the initial version of my article on the topic in our
dev-space.
http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/tmp/squashfs-deltas.pdf
I am terribly busy
On Sun, 2014-01-26 at 16:35 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
I don't think that's completely optional though, it sounds like a
one-way function. If have ever stabilized a package once then must
ensure a stable package forever.
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 18:26 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:52:47 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
The idea moves the work around, it doesn't lessen the workload at all.
It is an idea to solve your actual problem, which isn't workload.
You can easily
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 20:29 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 12:10:30 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
The problem isn't finding someone that has everything - we have people
that test on ARMv5, some that test on ARMv6, we have some that test on
ARMv7 - until
On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:13 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
I don't think that's what was being proposed, though. The question was
really the old complaint about slow architectures; the -* arch
solution sounds like the most reasonable definition of dropping
keywords, in the absence of AT
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 00:50 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 23:42:28 +0100
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Tom Wijsman wrote:
you shoot down solutions
Maybe it wasn't a very good solution that deserved to be shot down.
Maybe it was; what is needed here, is the
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 04:04 +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 18:04:19 -0600
Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
Your suggestion was expanding the arm keyword to armv4-linux,
armv5-linux, armv6-linux, armv6-hardfloat-linux,
armv7-softfp-linux, armv7-hardfloat-linux
On Sun, 2014-01-19 at 10:46 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Now what problem are we trying to solve? As I see it, it is mainly
one of manpower, namely that some arch teams cannot keep up with
stable requests, and I doubt that any technical solution will help
to solve this. Introducing a noarch
On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 13:07 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
When you say drop keywords do you mean:
1) revert the old version back to ~arch or
2) remove the old version.
As a maintainer, I would rather do 2, because I do not want to backport
fixes to the old version.
William
I'm not
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 02:32 +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
In my testing, one known issue was that git on uclibc did (and still
doesn't) work properly starting with git 1.8 - so I noted in the bug
that this was the case, and to NOT stable it for arm. Unfortunately,
someone else on the ARM
On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 20:33 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
I really don't like the idea of having no networking in the stage3 by
default, however, I'm becoming more open minded on what qualifies as
networking.
On Tue, 2013-12-10 at 06:23 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Steev Klimaszewski st...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 20:33 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
You're thinking with your x86/amd64 hat on here.
Actually, I probably just underquoted. I am well-aware
On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 10:28 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
Ok, now the concern is becoming more clear. You're intending to boot
directly to the stage3 and not chroot into it, and so you want the
stage3 to be a fully-functional userspace, though you don't actually
need it to contain a
On Thu, 2013-12-05 at 09:01 +0100, Martin Gysel wrote:
if you're on x86/amd64 and want to prepare a sdcard for e.g. arm. you
extract the stage3 to the card but then you can't just chroot and emerge
netifrc...
on the other hand, as long as busybox' default config includes a dhcp
client one
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 16:52 +, Alessandro DE LAURENZIS wrote:
Kent Fredric kentfredric at gmail.com writes:
Useflags have their perks for giving variations on behaviour, but having 3
effective packages in one, governed by useflags, means you'll have 3 much
more tightly coupled
-Original Message-
From: Carlos Silva r3...@r3pek.org
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] patch linux-mod.eclass to add support for
module signing
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 18:25:38 -0100
@@ -663,7 +696,7 @@
# This looks messy, but it is needed to handle multiple
On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 09:50 +, Markos Chandras wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hello
I would like to know about mobile team status and also show that this
team has important bugs assigned to them for a long time, some of them
with patches
Just picking a random response to reply to. I'm not speaking
officially, however, I'm pretty sure we at Genesi aren't going to pay
Microsoft in order to boot our own boards.
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Alistair Bush ali_b...@gentoo.org wrote:
snip
Use common sense here.
^^ Seems pretty clear to me.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:23:48 -0400
James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com wrote:
OK. Let me rephrase. Portage does not need to validate local
changes.
Sure it does. If it doesn't, and your local changes affect
memoserv
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Mart Raudsepp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On E, 2008-11-10 at 13:13 -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
Removing Stable Ebuilds
If an ebuild meets the time criteria above, and there are no technical issues
preventing stabilization, then the maintainer MAY choose to delete
On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 20:44:51 -0500
Jeremy Olexa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would suggest moving all the slacking arches to experimental
until there is desire from the dev community (read: manpower) to
support a stable tree
Not wanting to start a huge war about what arches are slacking and
which aren't - I asked in -dev on IRC and was told to check out
profiles.desc - based on this information, I closed Bug 208917 which
was about stablizing dbus-glib-0.74. The bug was opened on 04 Feb
2008, and as of today 05 Oct
On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 15:33 +, Duncan wrote:
Jim Ramsay [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:10:14 -0400:
Here's an interesting solution for those who find it annoying though:
Just file your own 0-day bump request in bugzilla. In theory
On Mon, 2008-06-16 at 23:04 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
Just for completenessess sake, i was nominated and declined. No one
likes my idea of teaming up with McDonalds to create the McGentoo meal
(each includes a free collectible developer bobblehead and
maintainer-needed bug).
Depends on the
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 11:39 +0200, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
On 12 Jun 2008, at 04:16, Brian Harring wrote:
Why the exherbo/paludis/PMS folk decided to go this route to report,
I'm not quite sure aside from assuming they're just griefers.
s-exherbo/paludis/PMS-pkgcore-g and:
On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 11:37 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
ebuild when it is being merged. If this really is so objectionable, I'd
just assume WONTFIX the request and move on with it.
+1
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Vlastimil Babka wrote:
dodoc calls should have || die and USE=doc should be tested before
commiting a bump, IMHO
Sorry, I didn't realize my 3 hour compile of $APPLICATION should die
because TODO wasn't around. Vote against || die - it doesn't affect
anything aside from misc docs not
Martin Schwier wrote:
snip
The gnome meta ebuild pulls in way too much stuff. I always have to copy
it in my local overlay and have to remove epiphany, evolution, vino,
ekiga and more. There are no use flags to control this and I expect many
gnome users to use Firefox and Thunderbird instead of
Sven Köhler wrote:
Why did you provocate this breakage?
Which breakage? It didn't install a gzipped pci.ids here.
That is with USE=hal. Crap...
Oh! So USE=hal forces pciutils not to use zlib?
And so the check, which the hal ebuild performs, should be modified to
check for USE=hal rather
Dale wrote:
George Prowse wrote:
Ned Ludd wrote:
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 20:58 +0100, George Prowse wrote:
Do any devs subscribe to -project because no replies have yet to be
heard from developers...
Please stop flooding my inbox.
It is an honest developer question because it was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
snip everything
not technical, take it to -project.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGn9rz1c+EtXTHkJcRAqEiAJ91+dcEu2/q6F1K/QTkqaHgWJUl0QCeMh6u
Steve Long wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
Not everyone sees that as a reason not to use a potentially useful
piece of software. We're not debian.
Could you clarify whether this is indeed a Gentoo QA issue, or in fact a
licensing issue? If the latter case, this discussion should prob'y go to
Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Steve Long wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
Not everyone sees that as a reason not to use a potentially useful
piece of software. We're not debian.
Could you clarify whether this is indeed a Gentoo QA issue, or in fact a
licensing issue? If the latter case
Vlastimil Babka wrote:
Gustavo Felisberto wrote:
Any alternatives?
Drop it from stable completely, possibly package.mask or move to
overlay. Why should this closed-source rootkit be in stable?
Said the java dev
Personally, I'd say if upstream doesn't provide downloads, nothing we
can
Jayson Vaughn wrote:
Ok,
Gentoo is over. As an outsider who has been following gentoo-dev and
other gentoo lists for a while, this is just completely nuts.
Is there any order or clear idea anymore for this distro? No other
distro seems to be as lost or confused as Gentoo is. And WTF is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:10:32 +0200
Benjamin Judas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...which means that he has a documented history of trolling not only
on mailinglists but also in irc-channels;
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
snip various good infos
The Code of Conduct was written with the hopes that its existence would
help to curb the flamewars and other general nastiness between people
within the community. The proctors were created to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
William Hubbs wrote:
Hi all,
app-accessibility/festival has not done a release upstream in some time.
We currently have several bugs against this package, including one
security bug.
Since a lot of blind people are now using espeak as their
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
Marius Mauch wrote:
Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an honest
question, maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have serious doubts
about it. It's of no use if people have to be
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:50:02 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No can do - temporarily banning is a bad thing, its censorship, and we
can't have that, no sir.
It's censorship when it's being done one-sidedly in order to skew an
argument based upon
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
Marius Mauch wrote:
Do you really think people would voluntarily use it? That's an
honest question, maybe people are fair enough to do it, but I have
serious doubts about it. It's of no use if people
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed on behalf of
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:44:49 -0500
Steev Klimaszewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or... perhaps when asked not to respond to a thread for 24 hours, you
could keep your fucking trap shut?
If I'm asked by someone with a good reason, sure. If I'm told to by
someone
Mike Doty wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 10:29:47 -0500
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.)
He changed the subject and signed on behalf of gentoo-proctors.
Is there a way to fix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Josh Sled wrote:
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
got out of hand. Perhaps the goal was laudable, but the methods were
not? (As an aside, I didn't realize that Roy's e-mail was supposed to
be a proctor directive.) Or are people really
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alexander Færøy wrote:
On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 12:13:12AM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
Isn't such use case just a replacement for elog? I thought news were
supposed to be delivered before upgrading. Also You should update your
configuration files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wernfried Haas wrote:
Just a general note to everyone in this thread:
I haven't had the time to read the posts in this thread, but proctors
have received complaints about behaviour within. For the time being, i
would ask all people participating
Bryan Østergaard wrote:
snip
On the contrary we warn people about not behaving badly and if that
doesn't help despite many warnings and complaints being filed we finally
take to firmer action which is exactly what have happened in this case.
snip
Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
Sorry, I am going
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 11:03 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
Been a while, upstream moved on in life but we continued to get interested users
filing bugs, so
genlop-0.30.6 went into the tree this morning. Primarily a bug fix release based
on what was open in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*daemons/applications that crashed:
dbus
powersaved - KPowersave
Networkmanager - KNetworkmanager
Also, the new hald didn't want to start, because dbus had crashed because of
the auto-hald-reload.
So we need to prevent this before it goes stable:
a) print out a big
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 11:50 +0200, Christian Birchinger wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:23:49PM +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
If you read what you are quoting:
Mozilla will drop support for that series from 24 April 2007 onwards.
That's still almost a month + the time
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
snip
Personally I understand why flameeyes took that to bugzilla; how else
could he say he'd gone thru the appropriate channels? Devrel (a
group, not an individual) weren't set up to respond quickly as others
have informed us all.
Case in point: you need to distinguish
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 01:46:40AM -0600, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Luca Barbato wrote:
T?th Csaba wrote:
hal cannot install when one dependencie built with zlib USE flag..
Hal should be fixed then...
lu
We've already been arguing about this on the bug, can we
Luca Barbato wrote:
Tóth Csaba wrote:
hal cannot install when one dependencie built with zlib USE flag..
Hal should be fixed then...
lu
We've already been arguing about this on the bug, can we please not
bring it here...
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Steve Long wrote:
Alec Warner wrote:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar/bashrc
At the bottom of solar's bashrc you will find some lines dealing with
AUTOPATCH, I don't see the bashrc.autopatch in his dev space, but you
can probably request it from him.
Would it be possible to post that to this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Just a heads up...
This is part of the reason that dbus .9x is still p.masked.
We are moving from dbus-core back to dbus - dbus will NOT be a meta
package for dbus .9x. It will be the core daemon. You should be
depending on either just the
Dominique Michel wrote:
It seam at it is a big problem with the livecd.
From the forum:
QUOTE: The problem is you can't use the GTK installer due to this problem. It
crashes out and leaves you with no option but to wash, rinse, repeat,
re-crash.
By saying they won't fix the bug the
Simon Stelling wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote:
The missing Stage3 is the real problem.
Apparently...
http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/x86/2006.1/stages/stage3-i686-2006.1.tar.bz2
http://gentoo.osuosl.org/releases/amd64/2006.1/stages/stage3-amd64-2006.1.tar.bz2
Chris White wrote:
On Monday 02 October 2006 13:30, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
We'll keep status in the topic at #gentoo-dev while we're working on it.
Alright, I'm starting a pool on how many people will still ask why cvs and
svn are down. Starts at $5, who'se in?
What about how soon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Simon Stelling wrote:
Hello all,
I would like you to share your comments on the attached GLEP with me.
Thanks in advance!
snip
I think it is over engineering of a non-issue.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Simon Stelling wrote:
Hello all,
I would like you to share your comments on the attached GLEP with me.
Thanks in advance!
snip
I think it is over engineering of a non-issue.
And to expand, per blubb's request, all
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
how about a local USE flag like all-the-junk-in-the-trunk ?
Why? Just makes more work for us, for no apparent reason. I'd rather be
able to pull unused stuff from the tree after a while than add a new
option to install stuff nobody will ever run.
Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
how about a local USE flag like all-the-junk-in-the-trunk ?
Why? Just makes more work for us, for no apparent reason. I'd rather be
able to pull unused stuff from the tree after a while than add
Noack, Sebastian wrote:
Hi,
I have a Palm Zire 71 device, with Palm OS on it and a 400 MHz
ARM-Processor in it. Actually I don't use this device anymore, so if
somebody wants try to get Gentoo Linux run on it, I would give it to him.
There is an SD/MMC-Slot which could become used to get
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm interested in arguments whether patches should sit directly
within the portage tree or downloaded when needed.
My feeling: downloading on demand is better.
+ makes the tree smaller, saves space, saves network traffic
- downloading lots of patches
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Not actually an eye-catching.
Ummm, D, as opposed to U... Yeah, that catches my eye. I am weird like
that though.
To be fair, do *you* actually look through *all* the emerge
output if there's any D flag, without the risk of overlooking
it someday ?
Yes, honestly,
Roy Marples wrote:
On Saturday 15 July 2006 19:25, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
As some of you already know, I will be taking a hiatus from Gentoo
starting this weekend. While I am gone, the mobile herd is pretty much
left without active developers. Uberlord and phreak have already
adopted some
On Fri, 2006-07-14 at 01:02 +0100, Ser Gio wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 00:19:44 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ser Gio wrote:
Hello,
Why does x11-libs/gtk+-2.8.19 has the X useflag? The ebuild
doesn't look like it's using it.
thanks,
Sérgio
Because
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 21:54 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
I'm proud to announce the arival of a future developer. His name is Tom. He
arived last monday on 10:22 am (UTC+02). I and my wife will take care of
mentoring him to full developership ;-).
In the meantime, he's got his own album on
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:30:27 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:14:24PM -0400, Peter wrote:
I did. Sources don't affect anything. The ck-sources are in the tree,
and
there is dire warning associated with them. Only the -mm sources have
any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Simon Stelling wrote:
Hey all,
To continue my development in an efficient way, I need a larger screen,
particularly one with a resolution of 1024x3972. However, I can not
afford the costs for such an investment, so I thought maybe the
community
98 matches
Mail list logo
