On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:23:37AM +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
Like I said before, I rather like the infinity sign. The trustees have had a
discussion on this part too. Their decision was that we need a strong,
compelling case for not using it since it is something the community has
voted on.
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:33:34 +0100
Marc Hildebrand [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marius Mauch wrote:
[..]
So much for background information, now to the actual question:
Would you rather have now the ability to create multi-hash digests
and Manifests with the result of a short and mid-term
On Thursday 24 November 2005 10:07, Marius Mauch wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:49:20 +0900
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 24 November 2005 09:32, Marius Mauch wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:04:32 +0100
Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok I have three
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: [Thu Nov 24 2005, 05:31:32AM CST]
What I'm waiting for now are comments if someone has ideas where to
put guides that does not belong directly to an existant project. And
if someone wants to join the effort of documenting maintenance process
for his packages,
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 03:44 +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 01:15:52PM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
OK. I've been looking at some of these issues we've been having, and
I've been thinking of moving enewuser, egetent, and enewgroup to their
own eclass. This will
Marius Mauch wrote: [Thu Nov 24 2005, 04:38:44AM CST]
GLEP I still have to start writing (mostly a reformatting of a mail I
sent a long time ago), there is already a prototype implementation
(doesn't cover everything yet but works generally), target is
for when current trunk will be released
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 11:38 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
I'd rather wait for Manifest2 support.
What is the ETA for the GLEP and the implementation after i?
GLEP I still have to start writing (mostly a reformatting of a mail I
sent a long time ago), there is already a prototype
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 20:57 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
Nope, not missing anything. Thought I said it, compability isn't a
reason to hold this up anymore, only asking if people want multi-hashes
now at the expense of a bigger tree when Manifest2 comes along.
I'm referring to portage-2.0.50
I'd like to add the apache2 USE flag to 2006.0's profile. This would
not resolve bug #95140, but would keep users from hitting it by default.
With apache being such a popular package, having it fail from a default
stage3 installation reflects poorly on us all. If I haven't heard any
good
On 23/11/05, Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel Ostrow wrote:
Lance:
I know this is a far cry from what you are proposing, and I understand
that the present CVS server cannot handle this sort of load but I
believe that this was the original intention at least...someone
George Prowse wrote:
What about finding out how many ATs are going to be using it at the
start and limiting the amount of ATs with access to 40-50 until
either a new way for access has been decided on or new equipment has
been brought it. Currently I wouldn't need it because I am without
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 15:08:19 +0100 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Thursday 24 November 2005 14:51, Grant Goodyear wrote:
| Assuming that they're reasonably well written, why not add them to
| The Doc?
|
| For the same reason the doc born outside GDP: quick changes, for
|
On Thursday 24 November 2005 20:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Of course, the problem
with that is that some our package maintainers couldn't stick together
a coherent English sentence even if they were paid to do so...
That's why I was thinking of a complete project with some doc guys assigned to
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 09:51:25AM -0600, Brian Harring wrote:
Please welcome Marien Zwart, aka marienz to the crew. He's joining up
as a python monkey, working on twisted (2.x stable ebuilds anyone?
^.^), portage 3 hacking, and pretty much anything python wise.
Finally, he's been helping
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:58:46 +0100 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Thursday 24 November 2005 20:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Of course, the problem
| with that is that some our package maintainers couldn't stick
| together a coherent English sentence even if they were
On Thursday 24 November 2005 21:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
*shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of
handling developer documentation.
If it's just matter of fixing the English in it, I don't think there's much
technical matter they would be required to think about.
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 24 November 2005 21:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
*shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of
handling developer documentation.
If it's just matter of fixing the English in it, I don't think there's much
technical matter they
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:49:18 +0100 Filip Bartmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| I want have Gentoo in e-shop with Linux distributions. I find, that
| Gentoo is under GNU/GPL. Must I distribute in e-shop sources of
| Gentoo too? Where I can found them(sources)? Where I can
my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16 and for the
one will come with the dev-db/mysql-4.1.15-r1 ebuild
Here is the relevant list of bugs opened (and closed) as a consequence
of the new ebuild.
[Bug 113451] mysql-4.1.15 re-keyworded as -* with no note in changelog
as to
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:51:42PM +0100, Francesco R. wrote:
# for i in libmysqlclient.so libmysqlclient_r.so ; do \
for j in .15 .15.0 .15.0.0 ; do \
echo ln -s /usr/lib/${i}.15.0.0 ${i}${j} \
; done \
; done
ldconfig should have created these symlinks, unless something was wrong
with
On Friday 25 November 2005 00:13, Francesco R. wrote:
did'nt know that, I will try in the ebuild too
Pretty please *don't* use ldconfig in ebuilds.
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE
pgp3ONHJ6JHnV.pgp
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:49:23 +0100 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that
| we can make it a sort of rule).
| How should manpages that are generated be managed?
|
| The common sense and looking to other ebuilds
On Friday 25 November 2005 00:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
man pages can't be considered optional (despite what RMS says). They're
not fancy extra HTML API documentation, they're core, so they don't get
a USE flag.
I know (and I *really* don't like info for one) but I think I'd rather disable
it
I honestly thought that the changes I made were better from an
accessibility standpoint. I guess I was wrong. Aaron was gone for months
and months and months so I was listening to the feedback from others and
trying to please everyone. I think I forgot that I took on this project
to implement
2005-11-25, Curtis Napier sanoi, jotta:
I honestly thought that the changes I made were better from an
accessibility standpoint. I guess I was wrong.
Not really.
So on that note, I've gone over the design and gotten it closer to
Aarons's reference. [...] Check out what I did change in
25.11.2005, 0:58:28, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:49:23 +0100 Diego 'Flameeyes' Petteno
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that
| we can make it a sort of rule).
| How should manpages that are generated be managed?
|
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 20:39:43 -0600
R Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* if ebuild installs COPYING and/or INSTALL into doc.
Is this actually important? There are a hell of a lot of ebuilds that fail
under this rule. I'd like to start filing patches for some of the packages
in this list so
25.11.2005, 8:06:51, Flammie Pirinen wrote:
2005-11-25, Curtis Napier sanoi, jotta:
So on that note, I've gone over the design and gotten it closer to
Aarons's reference. [...] Check out what I did change in the meantime.
Uh-oh. The usability regression from what the site was yesterday is
28 matches
Mail list logo
