On Fri, 9 May 2014, Jason A Donenfeld wrote:
I maintain the app-admin/pass ebuild. Inside the contrib/emacs
directory of the tarball/gitrepo there is password-store.el and
Cask ( http://git.zx2c4.com/password-store/tree/contrib/emacs).
I probably want to add an emacs USE flag that RDEPENDs
Dnia 2014-04-30, o godz. 20:14:35
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
The goal is to make overriding parts of build process easy. Before,
the eclass called cmake-utils directly via multilib_foreach_abi,
therefore user overriding a phase function needed to call
multilib_foreach_abi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/09/2014 04:07 PM, hasufell wrote:
I ask the council to vote on banning pkg-config files that would
be added or renamed downstream (at least this will prevent new
violations).
I want to repeat my stance from the linked bug that making this
Hi,
(please avoid cross-list e-mails in the future if possible. Makes
threading horrible)
On 05/09/2014 07:21 PM, Matti Bickel wrote:
On 05/09/2014 04:07 PM, hasufell wrote:
I ask the council to vote on banning pkg-config files that would
be added or renamed downstream (at least this will
On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:57:29 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I was wondering, is there a good reason we keep our own pkgconfig
files instead of communicating that to upstream and resolve that
properly?
Yes, when your instead of ... is not an option.
What other distributions
On 05/09/2014 09:08 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:57:29 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I was wondering, is there a good reason we keep our own pkgconfig
files instead of communicating that to upstream and resolve that
properly?
Yes, when your instead of
On Fri, 09 May 2014 21:10:50 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 05/09/2014 09:08 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:57:29 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
I was wondering, is there a good reason we keep our own pkgconfig
files instead of
On Fri, 9 May 2014 16:15:58 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think fixing upstream is a no-brainer.
It indeed is, this is the goal; you can force them in multiple ways,
some of which can be found on the Lua bug and previous discussion(s).
The controversy only exists when upstream
On 05/09/2014 09:32 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 9 May 2014 16:15:58 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think fixing upstream is a no-brainer.
It indeed is, this is the goal; you can force them in multiple ways,
some of which can be found on the Lua bug and previous
On 10 May 2014 04:34, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 05/09/2014 09:32 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 9 May 2014 16:15:58 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think fixing upstream is a no-brainer.
It indeed is, this is the goal; you can force them in multiple ways,
10 matches
Mail list logo