On 04-04-2009 18:49:50 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > + # killing these two on OSX/Intel will disable SSE, resulting in failing
> > + # compilations, as the headers expect SSE to be enabled (Apple knows
> > what
> > + # hardware they run on afterall, don't they?)
> > + [[ ${CHOST} == i?86-app
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:57:54 +
"Fabian Groffen (grobian)" wrote:
> grobian 09/04/04 17:57:54
>
> Modified: flag-o-matic.eclass
> Log:
> backport fix for x86-macos in filter-flags from Prefix
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.133eclass/flag-o-matic.eclas
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:42:43 -0500
Doug Klima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As it's been explained to me by one of your fellow PMS developers,
> since EAPI=0 is not complete yet, there will be no work on further
> EAPIs until EAPI=0 is complete.
No-one who has worked upon PMS has said that.
> I pe
Doug Klima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> As it's been explained to me by one of your fellow PMS developers, since
> EAPI=0 is not complete yet, there will be no work on further EAPIs until
> EAPI=0 is complete. Since this is the case and we still need to make
> changes, we must revert back to the
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 08:44:43 -0500
Doug Klima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A better statement on your part would have been "We need to ensure
compatibility for the greatest amount of users and requiring users to
have a version of Portage released after January 4th when i
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 08:44:43 -0500
Doug Klima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A better statement on your part would have been "We need to ensure
> compatibility for the greatest amount of users and requiring users to
> have a version of Portage released after January 4th when it's only
> the middle
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:15:18 -0500
Doug Klima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How many people are running a Portage version released after
January 4?
Eventually, all of them.
And until then, how many users are going to get things going weirdly
wrong if workarounds aren't adde
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:15:18 -0500
Doug Klima <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> How many people are running a Portage version released after
> >>> January 4?
> >> Eventually, all of them.
> >
> > And until then, how many users are going to get things going weirdly
> > wrong if workarounds aren't ad
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:26:11 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:54:34 -0800
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:26:11 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:54:34 -0800
> > Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140
> >> Alright
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:54:34 -0800
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140
Alright, so portage has put this stuff to stderr since January 4.
Then why are we also adding wo
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:54:34 -0800
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140
>
> Alright, so portage has put this stuff to stderr since January 4.
> Then why are we also adding workarounds to ind
On 21:37 Mon 18 Feb , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:20:52 -0800
> Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This seems like something ewarn should do on its own.
>
> http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140
Alrigh
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:20:52 -0800
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This seems like something ewarn should do on its own.
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage/main/trunk/bin/isolated-functions.sh?r1=9118&r2=9140
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/eclass/flag-o-mat
On Monday 18 February 2008 21:20:52 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@
> > # @DESCRIPTION:
> > # DEPRECATED - Gets the flags needed for "NOW" binding
> > bindnow-flags() {
> > - ewarn "QA: stop using the bindnow-flags function ... simply drop it
> > from your ebuild" + ewarn "QA: s
On 18:20 Mon 18 Feb , Sven Wegener (swegener) wrote:
> swegener08/02/18 18:20:47
>
> Modified: flag-o-matic.eclass
> Log:
> redirect the ewarn message to stderr
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.122eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass
>
> file :
> http://sources.
16 matches
Mail list logo
