Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New version constraints: variant one

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > orrr we could do away with punctuation abuse and make "[]" be a > "Parameter space" > > >dev-foo/bar[u:foo,v:>=3] I got similar idea here, but my version is that you don't have to use u: or v:. When I was

Re: [gentoo-dev] new eclass: tmpfiles.eclass round 4

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:11 AM, konsolebox wrote: I also prefer some things this way: - Indent the contents of the first `if` block for consistency's sake, and less confusion.

[gentoo-dev] [RESEND PATCH 1/1] kernel-2.eclass: Fix eapply_user as per PMS spec and execute in, src_prepare. Support older EAPIs with epatch_user.

Round 3. As per mgorny's additional advice, fix eapply_user as per PMS spec and execute in src_prepare. Support older EAPIs with epatch_user. export src_prepare only for supported EAPI versions. --- eclass/kernel-2.eclass | 35 ++- 1 file changed, 26

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 9:23:56 PM EST Andrey Utkin wrote: > I'm quite sure this angry rant won't be pleasant to read for anybody, > but still I believe this post serves the good of Gentoo and this issue > is technical enough to be discussed on gentoo-dev. Also gentoo-pr list > seems

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 02:27:17AM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > One more reason to use merge commits for pull requests: original > author commits with proper authorship will be retained. > > Yes, I know that some people are unhappy with non-linear history, > but this is how git works, so

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

On 11/30/2016 03:23 PM, Andrey Utkin wrote: > I'm quite sure this angry rant won't be pleasant to read for anybody, > but still I believe this post serves the good of Gentoo and this issue > is technical enough to be discussed on gentoo-dev. Also gentoo-pr list > seems retired anyway. > > This is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Developer GitHub usernames

On Mon, 21 Nov 2016 10:01:47 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, everyone. > > I've finally found a little time to work on syncing our teams to > GitHub. For this reason, I've prepared a mapping from Gentoo developer > names to GitHub usernames: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:17:16 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Andrey Utkin > wrote: > > > > I beg affiliated Gentoo developers to stay sane and be thinking not just > > about numbers of your commits, but also about community spirit and > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 09:23:56PM +, Andrey Utkin wrote: > The difference between my submission and final variant by Matthew is big > in number of lines, but is trivial in content as you can see below, so I > don't believe that Matthew has written his variant from scratch on his > own (he

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 4:38:57 PM EST Michael Mol wrote: > > You're asserting that Red Hat and Debian do things differently because > there's nobody to force them to do things the same way. It can't be because > there's no reference for them to look at; for sure, the second into market >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

Ühel kenal päeval, K, 30.11.2016 kell 21:23, kirjutas Andrey Utkin: > My PR: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/2765 > > My bugzilla ticket linked to it: > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=599088 > > After my pull request from Nov 6, the following commit gets into > mainline: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Andrey Utkin wrote: > > I beg affiliated Gentoo developers to stay sane and be thinking not just > about numbers of your commits, but also about community spirit and > relationships. Of course inexperienced contributor gets things not

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 03:25:21 PM William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:08:30 PM EST Michael Mol wrote: > > > IMHO it is something that should be a part of LSB. If not POSIX in > > > general. One cannot really change the past or current state of things. > > >

[gentoo-dev] Please retain authorship of contributed patches

I'm quite sure this angry rant won't be pleasant to read for anybody, but still I believe this post serves the good of Gentoo and this issue is technical enough to be discussed on gentoo-dev. Also gentoo-pr list seems retired anyway. This is a second time I've got into a situation when a new

Re: [gentoo-dev] Developer GitHub usernames

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 01:33:24 -0800 Daniel Campbell wrote: > On 11/26/2016 01:08 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Nov 2016 00:03:59 -0800 > > Daniel Campbell wrote: > > > >> > >> A funny deficiency of GitHub is it doesn't allow for open conversations.

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:08:30 PM EST Michael Mol wrote: > > > IMHO it is something that should be a part of LSB. If not POSIX in > > general. One cannot really change the past or current state of things. > > But can make > the future better. > > > For now who cares about other OS or

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 01:41:24 PM William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 1:22:07 PM EST Michael Mol wrote: > > If Gentoo wants to do it internally, that's one thing. > > This list is about Gentoo internal things Here, let me bring up a bit of recent history

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 1:22:07 PM EST Michael Mol wrote: > > > If Gentoo wants to do it internally, that's one thing. This list is about Gentoo internal things > But I would recommend > against inviting other distributions to use Gentoo's list, which was > something you seemed to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 04:49:24 PM William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:40:20 AM EST Michael Mol wrote: > > Highly detailed lists like that--used as a broad standard--are a bad idea. > > They represent a single synchronization point that everyone must adhere > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] linux-info.eclass: get_version: remove useless readlink -f

On 11/30/2016 11:45 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> On 11/26/2016 12:47 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >>> The values get clobbered immediately afterward, so why bother? >>> ... >>> qeinfo "Determining the location of the

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On 11/30/2016 10:23 AM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: A couple more links, I should have provided initially as they better support the argument. First from Debian, I cannot find a list, but it is clearly mentioned. "0-99: Globally allocated by the Debian project, the same on every Debian

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] linux-info.eclass: get_version: remove useless readlink -f

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 11/26/2016 12:47 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> The values get clobbered immediately afterward, so why bother? >> ... >> qeinfo "Determining the location of the kernel source code" >> - [ -h "${KERNEL_DIR}" ] &&

Re: [gentoo-dev] Step on my toes, please.

Sorry I had to lighten things up a bit On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 5:53:54 PM EST Andrew Savchenko wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:15:07 +0100 Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > Hey guys, > > > > Every other day on IRC, I see people arguing about touching each > > others packages, despite

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] linux-info.eclass: get_version: remove useless readlink -f

On 11/26/2016 12:47 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > The values get clobbered immediately afterward, so why bother? > ... > qeinfo "Determining the location of the kernel source code" > - [ -h "${KERNEL_DIR}" ] && KV_DIR="$(readlink -f ${KERNEL_DIR})" > [ -d "${KERNEL_DIR}" ] &&

Re: [gentoo-dev] Step on my toes, please.

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:53:54 +0300 Andrew Savchenko wrote: > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:15:07 +0100 Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: [...] > > (Sometimes it's even > > me who's doing the touching!) My instinctive reaction is always, > > "can't everybody calm down and be happy somebody is doing your work > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

A couple more links, I should have provided initially as they better support the argument. First from Debian, I cannot find a list, but it is clearly mentioned. "0-99: Globally allocated by the Debian project, the same on every Debian system"

Re: [gentoo-dev] Optimizing toe stepping

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 21:49:16 + Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 05:36:03PM -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > On Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:14:56 AM EDT William Hubbs wrote: > I have posted about this subject before, and I'll go and dust off the > proposal with the last

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Userkit.eclass

On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 8:54:42 AM EST Michał Górny wrote: > On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 18:13:29 -0500 > > "William L. Thomson Jr." wrote: >> > > I think you mean enewgroup and enewuser > > FYI, enew* functions handle UID/GID collisions gracefully, and just > fallback to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Step on my toes, please.

Hi, On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:15:07 +0100 Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > Hey guys, > > Every other day on IRC, I see people arguing about touching each > others packages, despite our policies against it. We don't have policies against it, we do have the policy regulating it. See section "Touching

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: gnustep-libs/smbkit, gnustep-apps/gwnet, gnustep-apps/camera, gnustep-apps/stepulator

# Bernard Cafarelli (30 Nov 2016) # Do not support gnustep-make v2 mode, last release more than 10 years ago # Bugs #591576, #592546 # Removal in a month gnustep-apps/camera gnustep-apps/stepulator # Bernard Cafarelli (30 Nov 2016) # Fails to build,

Re: [gentoo-dev] new eclass: tmpfiles.eclass round 4

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 7:11 AM, konsolebox wrote: >>> I also prefer some things this way: >>> >>> - Indent the contents of the first `if` block for consistency's sake, >>> and less confusion. >> >> I disagree; indenting the entire eclass is silly and does not really >>

[gentoo-dev] New project: GitHub

Hello, everyone. Following the recent additions to our infrastructure, I've finally decide to form the GitHub project [1] that was requested for some time [2] already. The project will mostly serve administrative and documentation purposes. In other words, we're the people who will maintain the

Re: [gentoo-dev] new eclass: tmpfiles.eclass round 4

On 11/30/16, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 3:38 AM, konsolebox wrote: >> - `[[ ${ROOT} == / ]] || return 0` seems to present a harmless false >> condition, and it doesn't show an error message. I would be helpful >> to have a comment

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-mod.eclass: Check for !TRIM_UNUSED_KSYMS

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 6:16 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:39:04 -0500 > Mike Gilbert wrote: > >> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Jeroen Roovers >> wrote: >> > --- a/eclass/linux-mod.eclass >> > +++

Re: [gentoo-dev] new eclass: tmpfiles.eclass round 4

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 3:38 AM, konsolebox wrote: > There are some things I noticed in the tmpfiles_process() function: > > - `type` currently also checks for functions, alias, and builtins, > besides executable files. If that's not intended, the `-P` option > should be

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-mod.eclass: Check for !TRIM_UNUSED_KSYMS

On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 10:39:04 -0500 Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Jeroen Roovers > wrote: > > --- a/eclass/linux-mod.eclass > > +++ b/eclass/linux-mod.eclass > > @@ -566,6 +566,9 @@ linux-mod_pkg_setup() { > > return >

Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog generation, profiles/ mess.

> On Tue, 29 Nov 2016, Robin H Johnson wrote: >> - one ChangeLog for each first-level subdir other than categories >> (i.e. eclass, licenses, profiles, etc.), > Already done, just querying if profiles/ needs more ChangeLog detail. Yeah, keep one ChangeLog for all of profiles/. The existing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Developer GitHub usernames

On 11/26/2016 01:08 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > On Sat, 26 Nov 2016 00:03:59 -0800 > Daniel Campbell wrote: > >> >> A funny deficiency of GitHub is it doesn't allow for open conversations. >> You're always forced to talk about something directly related to the >> code, like an

Re: [gentoo-dev] new eclass: tmpfiles.eclass round 4

There are some things I noticed in the tmpfiles_process() function: - `type` currently also checks for functions, alias, and builtins, besides executable files. If that's not intended, the `-P` option should be added. - What happens if neither systemd-tmpfiles nor opentmpfiles is found? -

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] distutils-r1.eclass, drop unused egg-base settings

On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:57:16 -0800 Brian Dolbec wrote: > While working on the last 2 version bumps to the twisted package, I > kept getting an error in which the *egg-info/SOURCES.txt file absolute > paths for all the files found in that very same directory. They are >