El mié, 20-06-2012 a las 23:43 +0200, Justin escribió:
On 20.06.2012 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400
Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Multilib (and/or multiarch) support
The current binaries cause a great deal of pain, particularly
when a user does
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 23:43:36 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 20.06.2012 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400
Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Multilib (and/or multiarch) support
The current binaries cause a great deal of pain,
particularly when a
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:08:55 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, if I remember correctly, Tommy asked for this some months ago,
you asked for what he sent some days ago and now you require more and
more work to delay things to be implemented.
I still haven't seen a clear
On 21/06/12 08:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 23:43:36 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 20.06.2012 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400
Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Multilib (and/or multiarch) support
The current binaries cause a
El jue, 21-06-2012 a las 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:08:55 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, if I remember correctly, Tommy asked for this some months ago,
you asked for what he sent some days ago and now you require more and
more work to
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:24:33 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:11:33 +0200
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/20/2012 07:07 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Please read the rationale. Again. The whole thing. Three times.
Please read my
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:29:49 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:24:33 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:11:33 +0200
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/20/2012 07:07 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Please
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:30:24 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:29:49 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:24:33 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:11:33 +0200
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:25:10 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Then, looks clear to me that the way to get things approved in newer
EAPIs is not clear enough as looks like a lot of devs (like me) don't
know them (for example, when things to be added to EAPI need also a
GLEP and a PMS
On 06/21/2012 10:37 AM, Ben de Groot (yngwin) wrote:
yngwin 12/06/21 07:37:15
Modified: lightdm-1.2.2-r2.ebuild ChangeLog
Log:
Re-tidy. Restore glib slot. Drop unnecessary gobject-introspection minimal
version (there is nothing lower in tree). Restore useful comments.
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:42:36 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
You just volunteered to write portage patches. Cheers.
Both were already implemented in Paludis, if you're looking for a
reference implementation to try it out. There are also examples of
use of SDEPEND in the old
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:16:23 -0400 as excerpted:
3. How does getting a x86 system to boot differ from getting a MIPS
system or ARM system to boot? Does it only work because the vendors made
it work or is x86 fundamentally harder?
I can answer this one. x86 is harder at the
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 as excerpted:
On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
POSIX Shell compliance
So far as I know, every PM relies heavily upon bash anyway (and can't
easily be
On 21 June 2012 15:39, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/21/2012 10:37 AM, Ben de Groot (yngwin) wrote:
yngwin 12/06/21 07:37:15
Modified: lightdm-1.2.2-r2.ebuild ChangeLog
Log:
Re-tidy. Restore glib slot. Drop unnecessary gobject-introspection
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:41:23 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:42:36 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
You just volunteered to write portage patches. Cheers.
Both were already implemented in Paludis, if you're looking for a
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:54:19 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
And since when was Implemented in Portage a requirement for an
EAPI feature?
Remember EAPI4 and features which had reference implementation not
in portage?
Actually, yes, since that was most of them. Nearly all of
On 06/21/2012 11:42 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
Please don't fix things that aren't broken.
ditto :)
On 06/21/2012 04:29 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 as excerpted:
On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
POSIX Shell compliance
So far as I know, every PM relies heavily upon
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
El jue, 21-06-2012 a las 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:08:55 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, if I remember correctly, Tommy asked for this some months ago,
you asked for what
On 06/21/2012 04:08 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:16:23 -0400 as excerpted:
3. How does getting a x86 system to boot differ from getting a MIPS
system or ARM system to boot? Does it only work because the vendors made
it work or is x86 fundamentally harder?
I
On 21 June 2012 05:33, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Here is my wishlist for EAPI 5:
[...]
POSIX Shell compliance
There has been a great deal of work done to give the user full control
of what is on his system
On 06/21/12 15:25, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El jue, 21-06-2012 a las 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:08:55 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, if I remember correctly, Tommy asked for this some months ago,
you asked for what he sent some days ago and now
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:15:02 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
Then, looks clear to me that the way to get things approved in newer
EAPIs is not clear enough as looks like a lot of devs (like me)
don't know them (for example, when things to be added to EAPI need
also a GLEP and
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote:
There is this vague idea that you can just propose something; get
consensus on the ML, everyone goes to implement it, and then it works
just as designed. That is usually called the 'waterfall' model and its
really hard to
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 17:50 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Then there are ebuilds that don't call eautoreconf, in the first
place. Should we require that all of them inherit autotools now,
just
for the unlikely case that user patches could be applied?
If the aim is to provide a working
Dear all,
according to git blame, this is the distribution of authorship across the
current git master of the pms tex source.
2 Pierre-Yves Aillet
5 Fernando J. Pereda
6 Mark Loeser
7 Richard Brown
8 Thomas Anderson
25 NotCommittedYet (???)
27 Bo Ørsted
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
In case you're not aware, the first time Gentoo did multilib, it was
done as a series of random changes to Portage that no-one really
thought through or understood. As you can see, that didn't work...
No, but paved the way
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 09:24 +0200, justin wrote:
Won't it be a good thing, if you instead of showing all of us, that
you
can tell where people fail to present something in the right way, help
and guide them to write the necessary things like PMS patches, GLEPs
etc., so that we can proceed in
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:04:41 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
Damnit, let the user shoot themself in the foot but let them
learn from it. Remember back in the day when you had no clue? You
learned from it. You can only protect them so much. If they want to
use custom patches
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:11:27 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
In case you're not aware, the first time Gentoo did multilib, it was
done as a series of random changes to Portage that no-one really
thought through or
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:14:49 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 09:24 +0200, justin wrote:
Won't it be a good thing, if you instead of showing all of us, that
you
can tell where people fail to present something in the right way,
help and guide them to write
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:42:11 +0800
Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
And users might
still have older gobject-introspection installed, with nothing
forcing the upgrade now.
Regular maintenance should take care of that. We are not in the
habit of specifying minimal versions for all
Dear all,
according to git blame, this is the distribution of authorship
across the current git master of the pms tex source.
Not that I particularly mind either way, but your stats are way off due
to reformatting. If you just use git blame, someone who changes a \t
to a \em in a
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:46:39 +0200
Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Not that I particularly mind either way, but your stats are way off
due to reformatting. If you just use git blame, someone who
changes a \t to a \em in a paragraph gets measured as writing that
line and
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:11:27 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
In case you're not aware, the first time Gentoo did multilib, it was
done as a series of random
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:25 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:04:41 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
Damnit, let the user shoot themself in the foot but let them
learn from it. Remember back in the day when you had no clue? You
learned from it. You can
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:13:50 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
And what did Gentoo get out of it?
What I remember is Gentoo putting in lots of work randomly changing
things until things worked, and ending up not knowing what most of
those changes were or why they were done.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/06/12 05:33 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
On 06/21/2012 04:08 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:16:23 -0400 as
excerpted:
3. How does getting a x86 system to boot differ from getting a
MIPS system or ARM system to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/21/2012 11:00 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
A firmware replacement for the BIOS does not need to worry about
floppy drives, hard drives, optical drives, usb devices, isa
devices, pci devices and pci express drives, etcetera, because
those
On 2012.06.21 16:05, Richard Yao wrote:
On 06/21/2012 11:00 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
A firmware replacement for the BIOS does not need to worry about
floppy drives, hard drives, optical drives, usb devices, isa
devices, pci devices and pci express drives, etcetera, because
those live
Michał Górny wrote:
Hello,
A simple solution to a program long-unsolved. In GLEP form.
Just a couple of minor points/nitpicks:
1) If an installed package has both IUSE_RUNTIME and REQUIRED_USE,
should REQUIRED_USE be re-verified:
a) for every dep resolution
b) when the package is involved
Roy Bamford wrote:
I take it the above statement is based on the kernel being
directly placed within the BIOS/firmware/nvram on the board,
This is sometimes called Linux-as-bootloader (LAB/lab for short) in
the coreboot project.
such that you couldn't boot anything else but that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/06/12 03:05 PM, David Leverton wrote:
Michał Górny wrote:
Hello,
A simple solution to a program long-unsolved. In GLEP form.
Just a couple of minor points/nitpicks:
[ Snip! ]
2) It's not forbidden for package A to depend on an
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:05:46 +0100
David Leverton levert...@googlemail.com wrote:
Michał Górny wrote:
Hello,
A simple solution to a program long-unsolved. In GLEP form.
Just a couple of minor points/nitpicks:
1) If an installed package has both IUSE_RUNTIME and REQUIRED_USE,
should
Michał Górny wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:05:46 +0100
David Leverton levert...@googlemail.com wrote:
1) If an installed package has both IUSE_RUNTIME and REQUIRED_USE,
should REQUIRED_USE be re-verified:
a) for every dep resolution
b) when the package is involved in the resolution for some
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 14:20 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:13:50 -0500
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
And what did Gentoo get out of it?
What I remember is Gentoo putting in lots of work randomly changing
things until things worked, and ending up not
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 21:26:26 +0100
David Leverton levert...@googlemail.com wrote:
Michał Górny wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:05:46 +0100
David Leverton levert...@googlemail.com wrote:
1) If an installed package has both IUSE_RUNTIME and REQUIRED_USE,
should REQUIRED_USE be re-verified:
Just a short note as it seems some confusion arises lately:
Ciaran McCreesh is not a Gentoo dev and his words don't represent
the position of Gentoo development team.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Michał Górny wrote:
No, of course not. Otherwise, every package manager run would
practically require it to re-validate all packages in the tree
(possibly not only installed ones).
Package manager must ensure the flags are valid when package is
in the graph. I would think of IUSE_RUNTIME as a
On 06/17/12 at 12:02AM +0200, Christian Ruppert wrote:
On 06/16/12 at 11:39AM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
app-admin/ulogd
app-arch/pdv
Feel free to get them
Thanks
I'll take app-admin/ulogd.
--
Regards,
Christian Ruppert
Role: Gentoo Linux developer, Bugzilla
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org wrote:
In the beginning there was a method...
And now it needs revamped.. I see no problem with re-investigating the
problem to make it better/easier/whatever.
++
I for one am happy to have had a working amd64
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Roy Bamford wrote:
So when you build a dud kernel and flash your BIOS with it, and we
all build the odd dud, your motherboard is bricked.
Any firmware modification has potential to brick, and shouldn't be
done unless you are
On 06/21/2012 06:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Roy Bamford wrote:
So when you build a dud kernel and flash your BIOS with it, and we
all build the odd dud, your motherboard is bricked.
Any firmware modification has potential to
On 06/21/2012 04:29 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 as excerpted:
On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
POSIX Shell compliance
So far as I know, every PM relies heavily
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 23:01 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
Just a short note as it seems some confusion arises lately:
Ciaran McCreesh is not a Gentoo dev and his words don't represent
the position of Gentoo development team.
Amen.
--
Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org
signature.asc
Amen to that too, but can you post the actual comments that he said ?
2012/6/21 Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 23:01 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
Just a short note as it seems some confusion arises lately:
Ciaran McCreesh is not a Gentoo dev and his words don't
On 06/21/2012 02:32 PM, David Leverton wrote:
Michał Górny wrote:
But in the current form, the spec doesn't allow passing
IUSE_RUNTIME flags to has_version() so we're on the safe side :P.
True. Do we want to keep it that restrictive?
Shouldn't has_version allow any atom that would be
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Sylvain Alain d2racing...@gmail.com wrote:
Amen to that too, but can you post the actual comments that he said ?
2012/6/21 Homer Parker hpar...@gentoo.org
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 23:01 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
Just a short note as it seems some confusion
Richard Yao posted on Thu, 21 Jun 2012 05:33:22 -0400 as excerpted:
A firmware replacement for the BIOS does not need to worry about floppy
drives, hard drives, optical drives, usb devices, isa devices, pci
devices and pci express drives, etcetera, because those live on buses,
which the
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:42 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:30:24 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:29:49 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:24:33 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh
On 06/22/2012 01:02 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Thu, 21 Jun 2012 05:33:22 -0400 as excerpted:
A firmware replacement for the BIOS does not need to worry about floppy
drives, hard drives, optical drives, usb devices, isa devices, pci
devices and pci express drives, etcetera,
Richard Yao posted on Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:38:17 -0400 as excerpted:
Would you (or someone else) elaborate on the specific features of bash
that people find attractive?
For me (not a gentoo dev), in simplest terms it's just that I don't like
having to keep track of what's a bashism and what's
On 06/22/2012 01:10 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
On 06/22/2012 01:02 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Thu, 21 Jun 2012 05:33:22 -0400 as excerpted:
A firmware replacement for the BIOS does not need to worry about floppy
drives, hard drives, optical drives, usb devices, isa devices, pci
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:38:17 -0400
Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/21/2012 04:29 AM, Duncan wrote:
Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 as excerpted:
On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org
64 matches
Mail list logo
