[gentoo-dev] Do you use repoman (lfull|last)?
If you *use* or *want* to keep this mode of repoman; please comment on the bug[1]. If you do *not* use or do *not* want to keep this mode of repoman, do nothing. This is an informal means to see if anyone is using repoman full or repoman lfull; if it turns out not I hope to cut a patch to remove them; because they are kind of silly. If you care about previous repoman results; I highly suggest running repoman and saving the output to a file using simple shell constructs, nohup, screen, or script. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247548
[gentoo-dev] Re: Do you use repoman (lfull|last)?
On 11/19/08, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you *use* or *want* to keep this mode of repoman; please comment on the bug[1]. If you do *not* use or do *not* want to keep this mode of repoman, do nothing. This is an informal means to see if anyone is using repoman full or repoman lfull; if it turns out not I hope to cut a patch to remove them; because they are kind of silly. As pointed out by many 'repoman full' was a typo and I meant 'repoman last.' Sorry for the confusion :( If you care about previous repoman results; I highly suggest running repoman and saving the output to a file using simple shell constructs, nohup, screen, or script. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247548
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remember: workarounds don't warrant RESO FIXED!
On 11/17/08, Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: В Вск, 16/11/2008 в 15:33 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет: - FEATURES=test failures; And what we are supposed to do if upstream states that tests are not supposed to be ran on users systems and exists for package development only? For example one upstream states that the purpose of tests is to test integrity of the program itself and not program's environment and he (upstream) is pretty sure that program works as designed... I assume the upstream developer does not test on the range of hardware that we have (he certainly doesn't test on mine) and so I think the tests would remain useful. Also relevant question: some tests require root privileges. What we should do in such case? I think a reasonable course of action would be a multi-pronged approach. 1. File a bug against portage detailing why the current facilities (such as RESTRICT) are not meeting your needs. Bonus points if you list some ideas that do meet your needs. 2. Add RESTRICT=test to these packages; with some sort of comment or identifier as to why RESTRICT=test # tests require root access for reason Y, see bug #XX 3. If reason Y is silly, attempt to engage upstream to make the tests run as a normal user. Note that a bug may already be filed against portage for this; I don't actually know. -- Peter.
[gentoo-dev] Adding NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND
Hi, I'd like to add NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND. Netbeans (www.netbeans.org) is modular IDE with 18 modules (clusters). Users can freely choose what support thay want to build in netbeans, though some modules need other modules to compile and work. Are there any objections? Here are the modules/clusters: IUSE_NETBEANS=+netbeans_apisupport netbeans_cnd netbeans_groovy netbeans_gsf +netbeans_harness +netbeans_ide netbeans_identity netbeans_j2ee +netbeans_java netbeans_mobility +netbeans_nb netbeans_php netbeans_profiler netbeans_soa netbeans_visualweb netbeans_webcommon netbeans_websvccommon netbeans_xml Btw, there is also request for this in bugzilla: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=211455 I'd like to put the ebuild in the main tree soon as upstream just released it and we have in the tree only 5.5.1 which is very old. Thanks for your comments. Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) Gentoo Java Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND
Just a note to my email, maybe it would be better to use NETBEANS_MODULES instead of NETBEANS as NETBEANS_MODULES is more accurate. NETBEANS_MODULES was even suggested by Betelgeuse in the mentioned bug. Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) Gentoo Java Team Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) napsal(a): Hi, I'd like to add NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND. Netbeans (www.netbeans.org) is modular IDE with 18 modules (clusters). Users can freely choose what support thay want to build in netbeans, though some modules need other modules to compile and work. Are there any objections? Here are the modules/clusters: IUSE_NETBEANS=+netbeans_apisupport netbeans_cnd netbeans_groovy netbeans_gsf +netbeans_harness +netbeans_ide netbeans_identity netbeans_j2ee +netbeans_java netbeans_mobility +netbeans_nb netbeans_php netbeans_profiler netbeans_soa netbeans_visualweb netbeans_webcommon netbeans_websvccommon netbeans_xml Btw, there is also request for this in bugzilla: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=211455 I'd like to put the ebuild in the main tree soon as upstream just released it and we have in the tree only 5.5.1 which is very old. Thanks for your comments. Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) Gentoo Java Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:03:12 +0100 Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to add NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND. Netbeans (www.netbeans.org) is modular IDE with 18 modules (clusters). Users can freely choose what support thay want to build in netbeans, though some modules need other modules to compile and work. Are there any objections? As a sometimes programmer who prefers Eclipse, would it be an option to do something similar for that IDE? This obviously leads to the question of when does a package qualify for such an option instead of using a set of regular USE flags... Just a few thoughts, RobbieAB. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND
I do not know about Eclipse that much but from my point of view there is a big difference between Eclipse and Netbeans. Eclipse is an IDE where you have to install plugins after installation of Eclipse to make yourself productive, whereas Netbeans provides complete working IDE in single package (with the possibility to include/exclude some modules), although the option for installing extra modules is available too. So unless Eclipse external modules are installed with the IDE, it makes no sense to apply the same logic for Eclipse, as the way Eclipse modules are distributed is quite different from how Netbeans does it. Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) Gentoo Java Team Robert Bridge napsal(a): On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:03:12 +0100 Miroslav Šulc (fordfrog) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to add NETBEANS to USE_EXPAND. Netbeans (www.netbeans.org) is modular IDE with 18 modules (clusters). Users can freely choose what support thay want to build in netbeans, though some modules need other modules to compile and work. Are there any objections? As a sometimes programmer who prefers Eclipse, would it be an option to do something similar for that IDE? This obviously leads to the question of when does a package qualify for such an option instead of using a set of regular USE flags... Just a few thoughts, RobbieAB.
[gentoo-dev] Re: Remember: workarounds don't warrant RESO FIXED!
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:52:25 +0300 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: В Вск, 16/11/2008 в 15:33 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет: - FEATURES=test failures; And what we are supposed to do if upstream states that tests are not supposed to be ran on users systems and exists for package development only? For example one upstream states that the purpose of tests is to test integrity of the program itself and not program's environment and he (upstream) is pretty sure that program works as designed... I think in this case RESTRICTing the tests or running them but not die-ing on fail would be fine. Also relevant question: some tests require root privileges. What we should do in such case? When I asked this previously I was told to check the current user's permissions before running them. I haven't had a case where I've had to though. -- gcc-porting, by design, by neglect treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Remember: workarounds don't warrant RESO FIXED!
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Also relevant question: some tests require root privileges. What we should do in such case? When I asked this previously I was told to check the current user's permissions before running them. I haven't had a case where I've had to though. On libarchive there has been some tests requiring root privileges; the temporary way out was to disable those tests, and the final way out has been working with upstream so that the testsuite itself detects whether you have root privileges or not and decides to skip the tests that cannot be applied. Just to say. In general I think it makes sense to be able to run _most_ of the tests as user, and discard the ones that cannot be run without root privileges (I expect most software not to require root privileges for the tests, it's silly to unless you need to work with file permissions or stuff like that). -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ pgpfrMDsRCvXs.pgp Description: PGP signature
