Yuri Vasilevski posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:20:44 -0500:
So I think it may be good for some packages to be split in several
packages (but right now I can't think of any), but I think it'll be much
better introduce more granularity into many ebuils with
Yuri Vasilevski posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:20:44 -0500:
So I think it may be good for some packages to be split in several
packages (but right now I can't think of any), but I think it'll be
much
better introduce more granularity into many ebuils with
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 01:21:22AM -0700, Duncan wrote:
reasons. If I don't have an SSH server merged, it can't inadvertently
be turned on somehow. SSH is apparently a dependency for something I have
I'm all in favor of server vs. client flexibility but this
example is kinda bogus. Assuming
On Thursday 16 June 2005 18:14, Rob Cakebread wrote:
Anyone have the source for the package aging list?
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/23231
Maybe we can find a new server to run it on?
I've asked that myself every now and then. aliz seems lost..
Guess we/I should recode
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:50:47 -0300
Rafael Espndola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has someone worked on changing ebuild so that it could create
many binary packages from one source?
A less intrusive solution (well, i think, although it would
still be an important change) would be to have some kind
Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten wrote:[Thu Jun 16 2005, 01:57:14AM EDT]
Let me explain: on Gentoo/Linux systems, all the base utilities
(make, tar, sed, etc etc) are GNUish
Before working on a solution to the problem, could we get a more
complete list of the tools in question? This has come up before
On Friday 17 June 2005 04:32, Aron Griffis wrote:
Before working on a solution to the problem, could we get a more
complete list of the tools in question? This has come up before but
the list seems to always end with etc etc ;-)
Because I don't really know how many applications are available
Hi all,
as some of you might already know we are working on a GLEP that is about
the status of forums moderators and admins in the gentoo project. The
main goal of the GLEP is to create a kind of quality assurance and to
ensure that upcoming moderators know about the forums guidelines.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jan Kundrt wrote:
Christian Hartmann wrote:
Feedback is highly appreciated.
IMHO if you don't require moderators of Local Forums to accept and
follow same guidelines as the global moderators, you're actually against
the point of Moderator as
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 04:27:37PM -0400, Jonathan Smith wrote:
Jan Kundrt wrote:
IMHO if you don't require moderators of Local Forums to accept and
follow same guidelines as the global moderators, you're actually against
the point of Moderator as Gentoo authority.
The main problem with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005, Chris White wrote:
I was given a user submitted ebuild request for the package panda3d.
However, upon reading the licesnse is it seems that it's one of those
sacrifice your newborn child and kill kittens type licenses.
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 20:44 +0200, Christian Hartmann wrote:
Hi all,
as some of you might already know we are working on a GLEP that is about
the status of forums moderators and admins in the gentoo project. The
main goal of the GLEP is to create a kind of quality assurance and to
ensure
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Saturday 18 June 2005 12:22 am, Andrew Muraco wrote:
Linux-2.6.12 is officially out according to kernel.org
Just an FYI for you all, and the vanilla-sources maintainers :)
/me looks around ... nope, this doesnt look like bugs.gentoo.org to me ...
-mike
Im
13 matches
Mail list logo
