[gentoo-dev] Re: perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi, Torsten Veller : > find "${S}" -type f -name "._*" -print0 | while read -rd '' > f ; do einfo "Removing AppleDouble encoded Macintosh file: ${f#${S}/}" > rm -f "${f}" > f=${f#${S}/} > # f=${f//\//\/} > # f=${f//\./\.} > # se

[gentoo-dev] Re: Unification of variables used within SCM eclasses

2010-04-12 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi, sorry for the late reply. Michał Górny : > a) Common variables - the variables which would have to be used by > various SCM eclasses as default/fallback values. > > 1. ESCM_DISTDIR (defaulting to PORTAGE_ACTUAL_DISTDIR/PORTDIR) > - an alternate parent dir to all SCM stores. It would be u

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Should we disable RESOLVED LATER from bugzilla?

2010-04-12 Thread Petteri Räty
On 04/12/2010 02:20 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 00:13:41 +0200 > Christian Faulhammer wrote: > >> Petteri Räty : >>> I don't think later is valid resolution. If there's a valid bug it >>> just means it's never looked at again. If the bug is not valid then a >>> different resolution

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread Fabian Groffen
On 12-04-2010 10:07:54 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > > if [[ -d ${D}/${VENDOR_LIB} ]] ; then > > Haven't checked, but quotes not needed? it's within [[ ]], so no. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level

Re: [gentoo-dev] Who is willing to be lead?

2010-04-12 Thread Roy Bamford
On 2010.04.10 15:00, Markos Chandras wrote: > On Saturday 10 April 2010 16:53:48 Petteri Räty wrote: > > As people seem to want the council to take action I offer to take > > action. As it's impossible for me to do everything myself I offer > to > act > > as a project manager/owner for people will

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Roy Bamford
On 2010.04.09 07:34, Duncan wrote: > Patrick Nagel posted on Fri, 09 Apr 2010 10:42:40 +0800 as excerpted: [snip] > Likewise, Gentoo's uncomfortable officially linking to something they > don't control in any way, shape, or form (except to the extent that > we could arguably pull his domain name

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Ben de Groot
On 12 April 2010 12:28, Roy Bamford wrote: > > Last time I looked, his about page complies with our trade mark > requirements. But ONLY his about page. Our name and logo guidelines state this needs to happen on each page: > the website clearly states, on each page, that the project is no officia

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread George Prowse
On 12/04/2010 12:32, Ben de Groot wrote: On 12 April 2010 12:28, Roy Bamford wrote: Last time I looked, his about page complies with our trade mark requirements. But ONLY his about page. Our name and logo guidelines state this needs to happen on each page: the website clearly states, on ea

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Arun Raghavan
On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowse wrote: [...] > If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are wrong. > Gentoo knows about the unofficial wiki and knows it's mission is to help > Gentoo and not to hinder it. Gentoo hardly makes a habit of Apple-like > litigation when tryin

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread George Prowse
On 12/04/2010 14:17, Arun Raghavan wrote: On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowse wrote: [...] If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are wrong. Gentoo knows about the unofficial wiki and knows it's mission is to help Gentoo and not to hinder it. Gentoo hardly makes a habi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Arun Raghavan
On 12 April 2010 18:49, George Prowse wrote: > On 12/04/2010 14:17, Arun Raghavan wrote: >> >> On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowse  wrote: >> [...] >>> >>> If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are wrong. >>> Gentoo knows about the unofficial wiki and knows it's mission

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread George Prowse
On 12/04/2010 14:22, Arun Raghavan wrote: On 12 April 2010 18:49, George Prowse wrote: On 12/04/2010 14:17, Arun Raghavan wrote: On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowsewrote: [...] If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are wrong. Gentoo knows about the unofficial

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Ben de Groot
On 12 April 2010 15:22, Arun Raghavan wrote: > On 12 April 2010 18:49, George Prowse wrote: >> On 12/04/2010 14:17, Arun Raghavan wrote: >>> >>> On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowse  wrote: >>> [...] If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are wrong. Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Dale
Ben de Groot wrote: On 12 April 2010 15:22, Arun Raghavan wrote: On 12 April 2010 18:49, George Prowse wrote: On 12/04/2010 14:17, Arun Raghavan wrote: On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowsewrote: [...] If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I thin

Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread James Cloos
> "ZM" == Zac Medico writes: ZM> On 04/06/2010 07:22 AM, James Cloos wrote: >>> "ZM" == Zac Medico writes: >> ZM> You can configure eclass override behavior via eclass-overrides in ZM> /etc/portage/repos.conf, as documented in `man portage`. >> >> ,< From that manpage > >> | When u

Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread James Cloos
A reasonable alternative would be to have a separate variable in make.conf, such as ECLASS_OVERLAY_DIRS, which specifies acceptable overlays for eclasses. In most cases, users would probably only have their own, local overlay there, and any eclasses found there should be used in preference to any

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Duncan
George Prowse posted on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:13:31 +0100 as excerpted: > If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are > wrong. Gentoo knows about the unofficial wiki and knows it's mission is > to help Gentoo and not to hinder it. Gentoo hardly makes a habit of > Apple-like li

Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 01:30:21PM -0400, James Cloos wrote: > A reasonable alternative would be to have a separate variable in make.conf, > such as ECLASS_OVERLAY_DIRS, which specifies acceptable overlays for eclasses. > > In most cases, users would probably only have their own, local overlay the

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project

2010-04-12 Thread Duncan
Dale posted on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:47:50 -0500 as excerpted: > Just to add two cents worth. I rarely, very rarely, go to the > "unofficial" Gentoo wiki. To put it simply, its not supported by the > Gentoo organization itself. When it comes to my system, I want people > that I know use Gentoo an

Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread Zac Medico
On 04/12/2010 10:17 AM, James Cloos wrote: >> "ZM" == Zac Medico writes: > > ZM> On 04/06/2010 07:22 AM, James Cloos wrote: "ZM" == Zac Medico writes: >>> > ZM> You can configure eclass override behavior via eclass-overrides in > ZM> /etc/portage/repos.conf, as documented in `man po

Re: [gentoo-dev] perl eclass review - EAPI=3 + new helper eclass

2010-04-12 Thread Zac Medico
On 04/12/2010 11:00 AM, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 01:30:21PM -0400, James Cloos wrote: >> A reasonable alternative would be to have a separate variable in make.conf, >> such as ECLASS_OVERLAY_DIRS, which specifies acceptable overlays for >> eclasses. >> >> In most cases, users