On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:01:15 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org 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
El jue, 21-06-2012 a las 08:39 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
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
El jue, 21-06-2012 a las 19:15 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
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
El jue, 21-06-2012 a las 11:27 +0200, Alec Warner escribió:
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
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 09:53:37 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Don't you see this way of handling things, with such and obscure way
of getting things accepted for every EAPI is really hurting us?
What is hurting is people demanding features without specifying what
the problem is, how it
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
What is hurting is people demanding features without specifying what
the problem is
Part of enabling progress is to show a strong will to communicate,
with the goal of extracting common understanding from discussion.
In any project based on volunteer effort you must show
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 11:53 +0200, Peter Stuge escribió:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
What is hurting is people demanding features without specifying what
the problem is
Part of enabling progress is to show a strong will to communicate,
with the goal of extracting common understanding from
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 12:24 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió:
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 11:53 +0200, Peter Stuge escribió:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
What is hurting is people demanding features without specifying what
the problem is
Part of enabling progress is to show a strong will to
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:24:32 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
As Peter explains, I think it is now clear enough what I was demanding
(about clarifying what is needed to get things in next EAPI to prevent
issues like Tommy is suffering to get multilib stuff done), but I star
to think
Ciaran McCreesh posted on Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:38:33 +0100 as excerpted:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 09:53:37 +0200 Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Don't you see this way of handling things, with such and obscure way of
getting things accepted for every EAPI is really hurting us?
What is hurting
Duncan posted on Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:37:38 + as excerpted:
Ciaran McCreesh posted on Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:38:33 +0100 as excerpted:
3) Given the above, it would be of /great/ benefit to your argument if
either Zac or Brian (or preferably both) stepped up from time to time
and said yes,
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:37:38 + (UTC)
Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
1) Fact: Unfortunately, your method of argument, Ciaran, doesn't
endear you to a number of devs. Some may have the impulse to reject
an argument simply because it comes from you.
Perhaps Gentoo should be doing more to
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 11:31 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:24:32 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
As Peter explains, I think it is now clear enough what I was demanding
(about clarifying what is needed to get things in next EAPI to prevent
issues like
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 6:44 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:37:38 + (UTC)
Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
1) Fact: Unfortunately, your method of argument, Ciaran, doesn't
endear you to a number of devs. Some may have the impulse to
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:05:51 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_86b67d8ab51a24922a3d3be75d10f42b.xml
That shows how things can be done and how shouldn't be done, it's not
casual that you are always involved in this kind of discussions,
Yes,
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Making constructive suggestions instead of others that can be
easily interpreted as whims is the way to go.
Uh huh, and that's what I've been doing the whole time when I've
been asking for a patch for PMS, a GLEP etc.
..
requests for a better description we're
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, portage@localhost wrote:
WARN: postinst
Please rebuild both libxcb and xcb-util if you are upgrading from version 1.6
I've read enough warnings like this (many packages use them) that it
occurred to me that perhaps there should be some better way of dealing
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:38:09 +0200
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
If you don't understand something of what thus far has been written,
then why not ask specific questions to fill those gaps, and move on?
The multilib material isn't at the point where specific questions can be
asked. Brian's
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
bring this to the point where we can say something other than huh?.
You can accelerate by making one guess about each thing on the list
and asking for confirmation of your guess.
It sounds silly, but I realized that this actually happens all the
time offline - at least to
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 07:40:02 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 7:32 AM, portage@localhost wrote:
WARN: postinst
Please rebuild both libxcb and xcb-util if you are upgrading from
version 1.6
I've read enough warnings like this (many packages use them)
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:52:24 +0200
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
bring this to the point where we can say something other than
huh?.
You can accelerate by making one guess about each thing on the list
and asking for confirmation of your guess.
It sounds
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 12:37 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:38:09 +0200
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
If you don't understand something of what thus far has been written,
then why not ask specific questions to fill those gaps, and move on?
The multilib
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 12:59 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:52:24 +0200
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
bring this to the point where we can say something other than
huh?.
You can accelerate by making one guess about each thing on
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:11:28 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Looks like you have now opted to use Brian's comment as a kind of
shield of similar and discuss only about multilib, even when this
thread was more general and we were talking to the problems shown in
recent discussions
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:16:13 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
What we *also* need is to document this requirements to let people
present that work directly instead of losing days figuring out what is
needed or what not
The requirement is that the PMS team needs to be able to
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 13:16 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:11:28 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Looks like you have now opted to use Brian's comment as a kind of
shield of similar and discuss only about multilib, even when this
thread was more general
Le dimanche 10 juin 2012 à 21:55 +0200, Sebastian Pipping a écrit :
On 06/10/2012 05:54 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
For libraries, if possible, try splitting gtk2 and gtk3 support into
different slots (see net-libs/webkit-gtk for an example; the gtk2-based
versions have -r2xx revision
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:53:47 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Le dimanche 10 juin 2012 à 21:55 +0200, Sebastian Pipping a écrit :
On 06/10/2012 05:54 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
For libraries, if possible, try splitting gtk2 and gtk3 support
into different slots (see
Le lundi 11 juin 2012 à 19:48 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 20:41:37 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
No, your goal is to provide a distribution. Gentoo has repeatedly
shot itself in the foot, leg, groin etc by favouring short-term
hacks over a well
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:02:41 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
It is handled better by working out what exactly the problem is,
and if you can't implement it nicely using existing features, then
not implementing it at all until you have suitable features.
Sorry to make
There's been a move towards using slots for clever things that don't
fit the traditional way of how slots worked. Examples include the new
gtk2 / gtk3 handling and Ruby gems virtuals.
Aside from being abusive, this screws things up for Paludis users.
Paludis tends to bring in newer versions when
Le samedi 23 juin 2012 à 14:08 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:02:41 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
It is handled better by working out what exactly the problem is,
and if you can't implement it nicely using existing features, then
not
Forgot to mention that, at least for webkit, this is really a case for
slots usage as this is the same software, built for another toolkit.
This applies to a couple other ebuilds in this gtk2/gtk3 discussion, but
admittedly not all of them.
We have at least three cases that Alexandre summed up:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:33:47 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well the problem is simple, we need to ship webkit with gtk2 and gtk3
support. This is needed because gentoo has gtk2 based desktop/apps and
because we want to ship gnome3 for example.
Cool thing is that webkit
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
There's been a move towards using slots for clever things that don't
fit the traditional way of how slots worked. Examples include the new
gtk2 / gtk3 handling and Ruby gems virtuals.
Aside from being
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
There's been a move towards using slots for clever things that don't
fit the traditional way of how slots worked. Examples include the
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:06:58 -0400
Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't quite understand why this would be necessary.
Would funky-slots just be used in situations where ebuilds with
the same PV but different PVR have different slots?
Taking the gtk2/gtk3 example, I think the
On L, 2012-06-23 at 15:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:06:58 -0400
Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't quite understand why this would be necessary.
Would funky-slots just be used in situations where ebuilds with
the same PV but different PVR have
Le samedi 23 juin 2012 à 14:40 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
I'd like to know why using USE flags until a nicer solution is
available
is sufficiently terrible that it warrants a hackaround.
remember qt3/qt4, gtk/gtk2. We want to avoid repeating these mistakes
hence the guidelines already
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:10:01 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:06:58 -0400
Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't quite understand why this would be necessary.
Would funky-slots just be used in situations where ebuilds with
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 21:19:19 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 23:54:21 -0400
Alexandre Rostovtsev tetrom...@gentoo.org wrote:
For libraries, if possible, try splitting gtk2 and gtk3 support into
different slots (see net-libs/webkit-gtk for an
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 17:51:01 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think you should start by describing the problem so we all could
understand it, and then we can start thinking about a solution.
It's simple: abusing versions and slots invalidates what is otherwise
sensible logic. Thus
On 23.06.2012 15:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
There's been a move towards using slots for clever things that don't
fit the traditional way of how slots worked. Examples include the new
gtk2 / gtk3 handling and Ruby gems virtuals.
Aside from being abusive, this screws things up for Paludis
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 16:45:09 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Le samedi 23 juin 2012 à 14:40 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
I'd like to know why using USE flags until a nicer solution is
available
is sufficiently terrible that it warrants a hackaround.
remember
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 17:20:23 +0300
Mart Raudsepp l...@gentoo.org wrote:
The 'standard' behaviour (which can be changed by the user) for
Paludis when doing complete resolutions is that whenever there's
a slot of something installed, it will try to bring in the newest
version of that
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you read what you wrote and thought about what you request from
others? Probably you better should.
Uh huh, and I think we all know there's a huge difference between
knowing what versions and slots are and knowing what a
On 06/23/12 21:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
There's been a move towards using slots for clever things that don't
fit the traditional way of how slots worked. Examples include the new
gtk2 / gtk3 handling and Ruby gems virtuals.
Aside from being abusive,
No, it solves a real problem.
this
On 23.06.2012 18:17, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you read what you wrote and thought about what you request from
others? Probably you better should.
Uh huh, and I think we all know there's a huge difference between
knowing
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:47:26 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 23.06.2012 18:17, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you read what you wrote and thought about what you request from
others? Probably you better should.
Uh
On 23.06.2012 18:53, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:47:26 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 23.06.2012 18:17, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you read what you wrote and thought about what you request from
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:17 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you read what you wrote and thought about what you request from
others? Probably you better should.
Uh huh, and I think we all know
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 17:53 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:47:26 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 23.06.2012 18:17, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:13:23 +0200
Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you read what you wrote and thought about
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:16:42 -0700
Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't think the documentation forbids what these developers are
doing.
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2chap=1
This means that counting goes as follows: 1.0 (initial version),
1.0-r1,
On 24 June 2012 05:16, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's covered in the devmanual and in the user documentation, so
there's no need to repeat it here.
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/slotting/index.html
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:23:57 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you send this proposal seriously or only to troll comparing it
with what you think tommy did with multilib thread?
Uhm, this proposal is exactly in line with dozens of others that have
been made for EAPI 5. It's simple,
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:16:42 -0700
Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't think the documentation forbids what these developers are
doing.
Hi,
A number of package using cmake and qmake currently do something like this:
LANGS=en de fr
for x in ${LANGS}; do
IUSE=${IUSE} linguas_${x}
done
This is ugly, so for some time the loop has been included in qt4-r2, and
I'd also like to add it to cmake-utils.
As far as I can see,
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:35:36 -0700
Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't think portage has the behavior that paludis does, so most
users are not likely to experience this particular problem. You know
as well as I that the marking isn't necessarily trivial.
But this time it is trivial.
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 18:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:23:57 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Did you send this proposal seriously or only to troll comparing it
with what you think tommy did with multilib thread?
Uhm, this proposal is exactly in
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:43:10 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
It treats -r300 as being newer than -r200, and so will treat the
gtk3 version or the jruby version as being newer versions of
the gtk2 version or the ruby 1.8 version, just as it tries to
bring in a newer GCC and so on.
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:45:46 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:43:10 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
It treats -r300 as being newer than -r200, and so will treat the
gtk3 version or the jruby version as being newer versions of
On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 03:37:59 +1000
Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org wrote:
--- cmake-utils.eclass
+++ cmake-utils.eclass
@@ -20,0 +21,29 @@
+# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: LANGS
Please prefix.
+# @DEFAULT_UNSET
+# @DESCRIPTION:
+# In case your application provides various translations, use
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 18:45 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:43:10 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
It treats -r300 as being newer than -r200, and so will treat the
gtk3 version or the jruby version as being newer versions of
the gtk2 version or the
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:54:13 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:45:46 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:43:10 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
It treats -r300 as being newer than -r200, and so will
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:56:42 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:54:13 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 18:45:46 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:43:10 +0200
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:09:03 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's just it, though -- this no longer holds. -r300 is now being
used for something that is exactly the same version as -r200.
Did you look at SONAME?
Look at SONAME before deciding what package to install? Kindly
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:06:38 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:09:03 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's just it, though -- this no longer holds. -r300 is now being
used for something that is exactly the same version as
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:40:50 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:33:47 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well the problem is simple, we need to ship webkit with gtk2 and
gtk3 support. This is needed because gentoo has gtk2
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:23:13 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:06:38 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:09:03 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's just it, though -- this no longer holds. -r300
On Saturday 23 June 2012 13:37:59 Michael Palimaka wrote:
+for x in ${LANGS}; do
+ IUSE+= linguas_${x}
+done
if you don't want to make it into an array:
IUSE+= $(printf 'linguas_%s ' ${LANGS})
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:26:01 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
You could just have gtk2 and gtk3 use flags in the ebuild, use
REQUIRED_USE to ensure that at least one is enabled, and build
things twice in the ebuild if necessary.
Ah, so because a few paludis users may be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/11/2012 07:08 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
No, your goal is to provide a distribution. Gentoo has repeatedly
shot itself in the foot, leg, groin etc by favouring short-term
hacks over a well thought out, validated, self-enforcing design.
Right
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:22:37 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:23:13 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:06:38 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:09:03 +0200
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:23:13 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:06:38 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 20:09:03 +0200
Michał
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:35:47 +0300
Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The package mangler does not know that 1.1-r300 is not a better
version than 1.1-r200, or that 1.2-r200 is not a better version
than 1.1-r300. Indicating packages where this kind of strangeness
happens allows
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:35:47 +0300
Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The package mangler does not know that 1.1-r300 is not a better
version than 1.1-r200, or that 1.2-r200 is not a better version
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:14:32 +0300
Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
If it is a package without reverse dependencies, updating to the most
recent slot and/or version should be expected unless the user has the
slot defined in the world file.
That's the part that no longer holds. The
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:14:32 +0300
Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
If it is a package without reverse dependencies, updating to the most
recent slot and/or version should be expected unless the user
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:27:03 +0300
Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:14:32 +0300
Alex Alexander wi...@gentoo.org wrote:
If it is a package without reverse dependencies,
Guys,
that was a test. I didn't expect it to write You will get this message once a
day until you've dealt with these so don't take it too serious. I'm sorry about
that but i just saw that *a lot* of bugs have been changed from CONFIRMED to
IN_PROGRESS..
sorry.. but *that* is more than just
On 06/23/12 at 09:37PM +0200, Christian Ruppert wrote:
Guys,
that was a test. I didn't expect it to write You will get this message once a
day until you've dealt with these so don't take it too serious. I'm sorry
about
that but i just saw that *a lot* of bugs have been changed from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 06/23/2012 09:59 PM, Christian Ruppert wrote:
Again: Don't take it too serious, if it helps to remind you that's
fine but ignore anything else.
It'd be cool to exclude STABLEREQs, but I support the reminder
characteristic.
- --
Gentoo Dev
On za, 2012-06-23 at 17:08 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Is it that Paludis installs a newer SLOT even if a reverse
dependency
explicitly requests another SLOT? Sounds like a bug to me.
No, it's that if a user requests a complete resolution, Paludis
installs the newest version of
Michael Weber schrieb:
On 06/23/2012 09:59 PM, Christian Ruppert wrote:
Again: Don't take it too serious, if it helps to remind you that's
fine but ignore anything else.
It'd be cool to exclude STABLEREQs, but I support the reminder
characteristic.
I think STABLEREQs should not be treated
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:36:14 +0200
Marien Zwart mari...@gentoo.org wrote:
On za, 2012-06-23 at 17:08 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Is it that Paludis installs a newer SLOT even if a reverse
dependency
explicitly requests another SLOT? Sounds like a bug to me.
No, it's that if a user
Le samedi 23 juin 2012 à 18:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
It treats -r300 as being newer than -r200, and so will treat the gtk3
version or the jruby version as being newer versions of the gtk2
version or the ruby 1.8 version, just as it tries to bring in a
newer GCC and so on.
I'm
Rich Freeman posted on Sat, 23 Jun 2012 07:12:29 -0400 as excerpted:
You can't fix it by beating people up.
Volunteers do it on their own terms... or don't do it. The outliers can
be moderated to some degree and thankfully the list isn't what it once
was, but get too strict and people simply
On 06/16/2012 02:56 PM, Duncan wrote:
Meanwhile, one coming solution to this, in portage 2.2 anyway, is sets.
Since I've been working with kde4 since it was overlay-only and sets-
only, no meta-packages, I've been using sets for quite awhile and it's
now entirely integrated into how I work
On 06/10/2012 11:18 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 06/10/2012 05:25 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 13:55:53 -0700
Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
A dependency atom will have optional SLOT and ABI_SLOT parts. Using
the dbus-glib depedency on glib:2 as an example [1], the
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 1:31 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/11/2012 07:08 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
No, your goal is to provide a distribution. Gentoo has repeatedly
shot itself in the foot, leg, groin etc by favouring short-term
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 14:40:50 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 15:33:47 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well the problem is simple, we need to ship webkit
On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Le samedi 23 juin 2012 à 14:40 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
I'd like to know why using USE flags until a nicer solution is
available
is sufficiently terrible that it warrants a hackaround.
remember qt3/qt4,
On Wednesday 20 June 2012 11:56:58 viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Meeting with bug: #409471 suggested that some ebuilds could benefit from
expanding -march=native to the actual flags the compiler use.
i can't really see how. if packages can't handle certain flags, then fix
those.
so NAK on adding
93 matches
Mail list logo
