this is semi-targeted @ robbat2
So I've been working on getting this ebuild working...
here's what I know
* 1001_all_show_patches-percona-5.0.75-b12.patch ...
[ ok ]
all patches before this work and mysql builds
---
these are the only later patches that will cleanly apply
*
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 03:06:11AM -0500, Caleb Cushing wrote:
this is semi-targeted @ robbat2
So I've been working on getting this ebuild working...
here's what I know
...
but with these patches mysql fails to build.
There were security changes in MySQL that caused the patches to not work
On Wednesday 25 February 2009 23:45:41 Mike Frysinger wrote:
cut
i recall it being incorrect in some cases (it checked for what dash
supports, not what POSIX supports), but that was a while ago, so maybe my
experience is dated at this point. otherwise, integrating it sounds sane
to me, and if
On Thursday 26 February 2009 04:27:44 Timothy Redaelli wrote:
On Wednesday 25 February 2009 23:45:41 Mike Frysinger wrote:
i recall it being incorrect in some cases (it checked for what dash
supports, not what POSIX supports), but that was a while ago, so maybe my
experience is dated at
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 23:43:44 -0100
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:02:46 -0800
Brian Harring ferri...@gmail.com wrote:
snip a few arguments
Ciaran and Brian,
please respect Pettery's request
On Thursday 26 February 2009 06:33:17 Timothy Redaelli wrote:
On Thursday 26 February 2009 10:32:52 you wrote:
i'm totally not following. we were talking about POSIX shell syntax, but
now you're talking about utilities as well ?
I'm talking about checkbashism.pl checks and btw type is a
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:21:23 +0200
Petteri Räty betelge...@gentoo.org wrote:
3) EAPI in locked down place in the ebuild
There's a less extreme variant on this that's slightly cleaner, and
with appropriate weaseling is also less messy. Simply add the following
very carefully worded additional
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:07:32 +
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
There's a less extreme variant on this that's slightly cleaner, and
with appropriate weaseling is also less messy. Simply add the
following very carefully worded additional requirement for future
EAPIs,
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:07:32 +
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
There's a less extreme variant on this that's slightly cleaner, and
with appropriate weaseling is also less messy.
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:17:36 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Is the following a stricter subset of your wording? --
EAPI must be set in an ebuild as the first non-comment line, and
thereafter must not be set to a different value
No. With your wording, the following are
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_81c676b7338c7c0dd10ce13b0e4684a2.xml
and
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_22ecf185ab30a470fa7c26c06633d495.xml
Pretty much give you a summary, nothing
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:26 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:17:36 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Is the following a stricter subset of your wording? --
EAPI must be set in an ebuild as the first non-comment line, and
On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so
it's a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero,
cardoe, dev-zero, and tanderson should fill us in on things below that
they've taken responsibility for.
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:19:20 -0800
GLEP 54: handling code from SCMs better
---
Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?
Still waiting on a summary ... perhaps if Luca's too busy, our
wonderful new secretary could do
On 11:19 Thu 26 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
GLEP 54: handling code from SCMs better
---
Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?
Still waiting on a summary
Sorry Luca,
On Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:46:04 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan nirbh...@gentoo.org wrote:
Ah, I thought I might be missing something. Then how about:
EAPI must be set in an ebuild as the first non-comment line, such
that bash does not perform any expansions during the assignment, and
thereafter must
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:19:20AM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so
it's a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero,
cardoe, dev-zero, and tanderson should
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:34:07 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Anyone but Luca please. Luca's been busy selectively ignoring
problems with his proposal, refusing to answer objections to it and
claiming it solves problems that it doesn't.
My last two
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:34:07 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm still waiting for you to answer this:
Be specific. Explain how this works when, say, 0.34.4 is current, you
have a 0.34.5_live and 0.34.5 comes out.
being live working as substitute for
A. On K, 2009-02-25 at 04:56 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 01:42:38PM +0100, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit :
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
This is your friendly
Mounir Lamouri wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
hk...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mounir Lamouri wrote:
Hi,
I was writing a trivial version bump for net-voip/gnugk-2.2.8 (bug
#258518) but upstream added a file named
21 matches
Mail list logo
