On Thursday 21 September 2006 13:15, Alin Nastac wrote:
Unless you save the specific compatibility version of the net-dialup/ppp
used by net-dialup/pptpd for building the package, I don't see how can
it help me.
Judging after /var/db/pkg content, I have no such information.
it is all there
On Thursday 21 September 2006 11:41, Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 11:11 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 21 September 2006 10:56, Duncan Coutts wrote:
If we do go in this direction it'd be great to be able to slot on the
ABI and still have dependencies resolved
On Saturday 23 September 2006 06:35, Duncan Coutts wrote:
I was worried from your ABI/API comments that you meant that we should
never be allowed to do it.
i was commenting on the more general case; SLOTing something that wasnt meant
to be SLOTed
-mike
pgpQseGjV9xuk.pgp
Description: PGP
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 06:20:44AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 21 September 2006 11:08, Brian Harring wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:43:11AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
i'm referring to the specific file of course, not anything else in the
package ... so integrating the
On Saturday 23 September 2006 09:14, Brian Harring wrote:
You're assuming that after the merge of the pkg that breaks
compatibility, building is actually _still_ possible for the depends.
of course i am; i just said that portage would make sure to not unmerge any
ABI lib still in use
We
On Saturday 23 September 2006 09:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 23 September 2006 09:14, Brian Harring wrote:
We don't classify our deps as actual build depends vs link depends; as
such trying to (essentially) patch things up after allow for the
scenario where merging breaks the
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 21 September 2006 13:15, Alin Nastac wrote:
Unless you save the specific compatibility version of the net-dialup/ppp
used by net-dialup/pptpd for building the package, I don't see how can
it help me.
Judging after /var/db/pkg content, I have no such
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 09:50:12AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 23 September 2006 09:14, Brian Harring wrote:
You're assuming that after the merge of the pkg that breaks
compatibility, building is actually _still_ possible for the depends.
of course i am; i just said that
On Saturday 23 September 2006 10:24, Alin Nastac wrote:
I see only libraries in NEEDED and it is probably generated
automatically. There is no way for the automatic tools to discover the
dependency between pptpd and ppp version.
that gets back to ABI versus dynamic plugins ... we already know
On Sat, Sep 23, 2006 at 10:34:03AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 23 September 2006 10:24, Alin Nastac wrote:
I see only libraries in NEEDED and it is probably generated
automatically. There is no way for the automatic tools to discover the
dependency between pptpd and ppp
No game I've installed here needs any package with the oss USE flag, those packages that use OSS are fine the ALSA OSS Emulation.2006/9/24, Ryan Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:Mike Frysinger wrote: oss is dead, why bother going with it in default USE anymore ?alsa forever !
i think the standard argument
On Sunday 24 September 2006 00:13, Christoph Mende wrote:
No game I've installed here needs any package with the oss USE flag, those
packages that use OSS are fine the ALSA OSS Emulation.
That requires oss useflag on alsa-driver.
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò -
Well ok, I don't use alsa-driver ;)2006/9/24, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sunday 24 September 2006 00:13, Christoph Mende wrote: No game I've installed here needs any package with the oss USE flag, those packages that use OSS are fine the ALSA OSS Emulation.That requires oss
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Sunday 24 September 2006 00:13, Christoph Mende wrote:
No game I've installed here needs any package with the oss USE flag, those
packages that use OSS are fine the ALSA OSS Emulation.
That requires oss useflag on alsa-driver.
How bout changing
On Sunday 24 September 2006 03:21, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
How bout changing this flag to aoss and making it new default instead
of oss? mozilla-launcher already has an aoss flag.
A flag that I don't like at all, as it should have probably been alsa, but
it was difficult to implement without
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:01:40 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Thursday 21 September 2006 10:54, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
| Yes, I agree with you. For example, take expat. The maintainers have
| refused to allow both versions to exist simultaneously on a system
| because it
16 matches
Mail list logo
