On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:18:01 +0100
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
It's pretty strange, but after the last emerge -1uDN world system
update I lost bash-complition. It was removed
Dnia 2014-11-20, o godz. 11:58:59
Diamond diam...@hi-net.ru napisał(a):
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:18:01 +0100
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
It's pretty strange, but after the last emerge -1uDN
Dnia 2014-11-10, o godz. 22:18:01
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about
* Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
bashcomp in bashrc.
Please
Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58
Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
* Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
suggested
Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58
Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
* Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
suggested
* Michał Górny schrieb am 11.11.14 um 12:06 Uhr:
Dnia 2014-11-11, o godz. 09:53:58
Marc Schiffbauer msch...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
* Michał Górny schrieb am 10.11.14 um 22:18 Uhr:
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the
Hello, developers.
I'm planning to commit this news item before =2.1-r90 goes stable.
I have rewritten the message to be more user-oriented like Rich
suggested (big thanks to you!) and added a paragraph about loading
bashcomp in bashrc.
Please review.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
Title:
Dnia 2014-10-13, o godz. 12:23:52
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
El lun, 13-10-2014 a las 11:35 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
Please review the following news item.
[...]
The current eselect-bashcomp setup will *not* be migrated. It may be
necessary to rebuild packages
Dnia 2014-10-14, o godz. 02:41:58
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se napisał(a):
Peter Stuge wrote:
There is a severe behavioral penalty!
Rich Freeman wrote:
I really do not want that to be chosen for me.
Well, then all you need to do is tell eselect to disable them, etc.
Well, but see
Please review the following news item.
-
Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: -MM-DD
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: app-shells/bash-completion-2.1-r90
Starting with
El lun, 13-10-2014 a las 11:35 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
Please review the following news item.
[...]
The current eselect-bashcomp setup will *not* be migrated. It may be
necessary to rebuild packages installing completions after the upgrade,
and remove old configuration symlinks
On 13/10/14 05:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Please review the following news item.
-
Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: -MM-DD
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:37:19AM -0400, Alex Xu wrote:
On 13/10/14 05:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Please review the following news item.
-
Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: -MM-DD
Revision: 1
Michał Górny wrote:
the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
Why is it desirable to make that change?
//Peter
pgpAbh_XiMjXl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Michał Górny wrote:
the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
Why is it desirable to make that change?
//Peter
Disregard previous fat-finger reply...
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Michał Górny wrote:
the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
Why is it desirable to make that change?
See my previous email:
3. Unlike in the past, there is no longer a
Rich Freeman wrote:
the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
Why is it desirable to make that change?
there is no longer a performance penalty
There is a severe behavioral penalty!
We think that most users will prefer to just leave everything enabled now.
I really do not want
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
I really do not want that to be chosen for me.
Opt-out is not cool. :(
Well, then all you need to do is tell eselect to disable them, etc.
It always seemed pointless to me that there are a million bash
completion filters
Peter Stuge wrote:
There is a severe behavioral penalty!
Rich Freeman wrote:
I really do not want that to be chosen for me.
Well, then all you need to do is tell eselect to disable them, etc.
Well, but see above - this is a huge change in behavior - I really
don't think that should be done
On Tue Oct 14 03:32:32 2014 Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
Why is it desirable to make that change?
there is no longer a performance penalty
There is a severe behavioral penalty!
We think that most
21 matches
Mail list logo