On Monday 10 December 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> {
> ...
> echo "CONFIG_EAP_SAKE=y"
> ...
> } >> ${CONFIG}
cat <<-EOF >> ${CONFIG}
...
CONFIG_EAP_SAKE=y
...
EOF
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 10:34 Mon 10 Dec , Santiago M. Mola wrote:
On Dec 10, 2007 10:21 AM, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
While we're getting a bit off the original topic here, it occurred to me
that using SLOTs for this, in combination with various SLOT deps and
SLOT bloc
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Incidentally, I suspect the gcc example with _p is confusing people. The
normal use for an -scm suffix will be as follows:
Yeah I abused the _p suffix. My bad.
The whole _p thing only comes up for those very rare (or possibly
non-existent) projects that have patchset b
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2007 8:44 PM, Robert Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That would still mean everything relies on n ebuilds with mutual blocks.
>> Even if that would work and it block upgrades, it is still not a
>> solution in terms of how to display a list of ebuilds in
On 22:07 Mon 10 Dec , Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>
> > vmmouse input driver (For X inside VMWare)
> > vmware (For X inside VMWare)
> I can take those two if nobody else wants them.
They're all yours. Thanks! The nice thing about them is that there
aren't any open bugs
On 09:42 Mon 10 Dec , Bjarke Istrup Pedersen (gurligebis) wrote:
> 1.1 net-wireless/hostapd/hostapd-0.6.1.ebuild
>
> file :
> http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/net-wireless/hostapd/hostapd-0.6.1.ebuild?rev=1.1&view=markup
> plain:
> http://sources.gentoo.org/vi
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> vmmouse input driver (For X inside VMWare)
> vmware (For X inside VMWare)
I can take those two if nobody else wants them.
--
Tiziano Müller
Gentoo Linux Developer
Areas of responsibility: Samba, PostgreSQL, cpp, Python
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG FP : F327
Doug Klima wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Currently our Heimdal packages and MIT-KRB5 packages are woefully out of
> date. I know Seemant tried for a while and I have been trying to recruit
> maintainers for these packages but completely unsuccessfully. So I turn
> to the mailing list to hopefully recru
On Dec 11, 2007 1:14 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course this could be extended to apply only to branch ebuilds
> without a version number (where you know when the branch will be
> merged), etc.
s/you know/you don't know/
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing
On Dec 10, 2007 8:44 PM, Robert Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That would still mean everything relies on n ebuilds with mutual blocks.
> Even if that would work and it block upgrades, it is still not a
> solution in terms of how to display a list of ebuilds in one tree in an
> ordered list.
On 10:34 Mon 10 Dec , Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2007 10:21 AM, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 00:26 Mon 10 Dec , Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > > What I've got for my Xorg testing setup, is foo--rX, with a number
> > > of different -X values that I just select
On Monday, 10. December 2007, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2007 6:29 PM, Robert Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1) You cannot define a total order on those names:
> > Is
> >maa/moo-3-scm_bONECOOLFEATURE
> > <
> >maa/moo-3-scm_bOTHERCOOLFEATURE
> > ?
>
> Why not have them b
Hello all,
Currently our Heimdal packages and MIT-KRB5 packages are woefully out of
date. I know Seemant tried for a while and I have been trying to recruit
maintainers for these packages but completely unsuccessfully. So I turn
to the mailing list to hopefully recruit someone. I don't use Heimdal
On Dec 10, 2007 6:29 PM, Robert Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) You cannot define a total order on those names:
> Is
>maa/moo-3-scm_bONECOOLFEATURE
> <
>maa/moo-3-scm_bOTHERCOOLFEATURE
> ?
Why not have them block each other such that only one branch can be
installed at a time? T
On Monday, 10. December 2007, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> Why not just have something like
> sys-devel/gcc-4.2.3_p20071127-scm_b${BRANCHNAME}-r1 ?
1) You cannot define a total order on those names:
Is
maa/moo-3-scm_bONECOOLFEATURE
<
maa/moo-3-scm_bOTHERCOOLFEATURE
?
2) It will break updati
On Dec 10, 2007 10:21 AM, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 00:26 Mon 10 Dec , Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > What I've got for my Xorg testing setup, is foo--rX, with a number
> > of different -X values that I just select from via package.{un,}mask
> > while testing - this saves
On 00:26 Mon 10 Dec , Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> What I've got for my Xorg testing setup, is foo--rX, with a number
> of different -X values that I just select from via package.{un,}mask
> while testing - this saves altering everything else in the tree to pick
> some package that has a diffe
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:36:04 -0800
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 08:24:27AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > mypkg-scm
> One devil's advocate question for now.
> Regardless of which suffix we pick, given that it is a well-known
> suffix, what will be t
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 08:24:27AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> mypkg-scm
One devil's advocate question for now.
Regardless of which suffix we pick, given that it is a well-known
suffix, what will be the expected behavior when PN = 'foo-scm'?
There's at least one package on Freshmeat with t
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 00:26:21 -0800
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's two cases of branches I see (irrelevant of the names used):
> Major version branches - eg CVS "cvs-1.11.x" and "cvs-1.12.x"
> (those are the actual upstream branch names, I've seen other packages
> using the
On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 07:18:26AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 20:31:46 -0800
> Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 18:57 Sun 09 Dec , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 19:45:27 +0100
> > > Jan Kundr??t <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > What
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 13:14:56 +0530
"Nirbheek Chauhan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2007 12:48 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Feature as opposed to release branches would still have to be
> > separate packages, especially if you need to depend upon a
> > particular f
22 matches
Mail list logo