On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 13:48:37 +0200
Luis Ressel wrote:
> I think I'd rather go with the original workflow. Okay, perhaps
> package.masking - is a bit uncommon and clutters package.mask, but
> it's not all *that* bad and it eases the workflow.
Depends on whose workflow you are referring to; it
Am 2014-07-30 19:33, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>
> On 30/07/14 20:29, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>> Am 2014-07-30 14:33, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>>> There is no need to package.mask if proper if -logic is used, like, for
>>> example,
>>>
>>> if [[ ${PV} == * ]]; then
>>> inherit git-r3
>>>
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 07:29:22PM +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>
> Am 2014-07-30 14:33, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
> >
> > There is no need to package.mask if proper if -logic is used, like, for
> > example,
> >
> > if [[ ${PV} == * ]]; then
> > inherit git-r3
> > KEYWORDS=""
> > else
On 30/07/14 20:29, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> Am 2014-07-30 14:33, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>> There is no need to package.mask if proper if -logic is used, like, for
>> example,
>>
>> if [[ ${PV} == * ]]; then
>> inherit git-r3
>> KEYWORDS=""
>> else
>> KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~arm64 ~x86"
Am 2014-07-30 14:33, schrieb Samuli Suominen:
>
> There is no need to package.mask if proper if -logic is used, like, for
> example,
>
> if [[ ${PV} == * ]]; then
> inherit git-r3
> KEYWORDS=""
> else
> KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~arm64 ~x86"
> fi
>
> Then you can just `cp foo-.ebuild foo-1.
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:33:19 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> There is no need to package.mask if proper if -logic is used, like,
> for example,
>
> if [[ ${PV} == * ]]; then
> inherit git-r3
> KEYWORDS=""
> else
> KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~arm64 ~x86"
> fi
>
> Then you can just `cp foo-.ebu
On 30/07/14 14:48, Luis Ressel wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:38:16 + (UTC)
> Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> In the context of that policy and a content-touchless-bump goal, I
>> suppose I'd script the bump, pulling keywords from the highest
>> previous version, prepending the ~ a
On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:38:16 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> In the context of that policy and a content-touchless-bump goal, I
> suppose I'd script the bump, pulling keywords from the highest
> previous version, prepending the ~ as necessary and inserting them in
> the keyword
Denis Dupeyron posted on Tue, 29 Jul 2014 07:58:26 -0600 as excerpted:
> [H]ere is what I was instructed to teach recruits back when I became a
> recruiter in 2006 or 2007, and what competent developers have been doing
> since even before I was a developer:
>
> The package.mask file is only for t
On 29/07/14 03:15, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen
> wrote:
>> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
>> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>> x265-.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>>
>> As in... You forgot to add ~arm to -.ebu
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> AFAIK, gentoo policy is that live ebuilds should always be masked so as
> never to be automatically pulled in without a deliberate unmasking of the
> live ebuild, but whether that's masked due to lack of keywords (ebuild),
> or
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Alex Xu wrote:
> http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/media-libs/x265/x265-.ebuild?revision=1.9&view=markup#l9
Thanks, Alex. This makes more sense now.
Denis.
Denis Dupeyron posted on Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:15:20 -0600 as excerpted:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen
> wrote:
>> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
>> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>> x265-.ebuild: KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>>
>> As in... You for
On 28/07/14 08:15 PM, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen
> wrote:
>> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
>> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>> x265-.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>>
>> As in... You forgot to add ~arm to -.e
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
> x265-.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>
> As in... You forgot to add ~arm to -.ebuild
Wait, what? Live ebuilds are keyworded now?
De
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 11:02:58 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 28/07/14 09:41, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > On 27/07/14 22:01, Markus Meier (maekke) wrote:
> >> maekke 14/07/27 19:01:15
> >>
> >> Modified: x265-1.0.ebuild ChangeLog x265-1.2.ebuild
> >>
On 28/07/14 09:41, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 27/07/14 22:01, Markus Meier (maekke) wrote:
>> maekke 14/07/27 19:01:15
>>
>> Modified: x265-1.0.ebuild ChangeLog x265-1.2.ebuild
>> x265-0.8.ebuild
>> Log:
>> add ~arm, bug #510340
> Package bumping is
On 27/07/14 22:01, Markus Meier (maekke) wrote:
> maekke 14/07/27 19:01:15
>
> Modified: x265-1.0.ebuild ChangeLog x265-1.2.ebuild
> x265-0.8.ebuild
> Log:
> add ~arm, bug #510340
Package bumping is done by, eg.:
# cp x265-.ebuild x265-1.3.ebuil
18 matches
Mail list logo
