[gentoo-dev] killsoft - Resignation
Hi, Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to Gentoo for the time I have been here. Other tasks have recently prevented me from devoting adequate time to Gentoo. Rather than do a poor job, I feel it would be better to discontinue being an official developer. Please delete any Gentoo developer accounts. I can be reached via email at "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". Thank you. Regards, Robb Romans (killsoft) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:04:23PM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote: [Wed Oct 05 2005, 02:47:09PM EDT]
> >> diefunc() {
> >> local funcname="$1" lineno="$2" exitcode="$3"
> >> shift 3
> >> @@ -289,6 +291,7 @@
> >> echo "!!! ${*:-(no error message)}" >&2
> >> echo "!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT
> >this status message." >&2
> >> echo >&2
> >> + for x in $EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS; do
> >> + ${x} "$1" "$2" "$3"
> >> + done
> >> exit 1
> >> }
>
> Is this exactly what went in? It looks like you're trying to use
> positional params that were shifted earlier.
No, the hooks are called with "$@" actually, plus some checks to
ensure that
A) the output goes to stderr, which is the norm for die
B) the hooks aren't engaged during depends phase.
if people are after the func/line/exit code being handed to the hook,
it can be changed, the intention was for this to allow dumping extra
debug info.
~harring
pgpP7mr8CIrft.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die
Brian Harring wrote:[Wed Oct 05 2005, 02:47:09PM EDT]
> diefunc() {
> local funcname="$1" lineno="$2" exitcode="$3"
> shift 3
> @@ -289,6 +291,7 @@
> echo "!!! ${*:-(no error message)}" >&2
> echo "!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status
message." >&2
> echo >&2
> + for x in $EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS; do
> + ${x} "$1" "$2" "$3"
> + done
> exit 1
> }
Is this exactly what went in? It looks like you're trying to use
positional params that were shifted earlier.
Regards,
Aron
--
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer
pgpUEDxFafRfx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 13:47 -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> 2.0.51_rc4
And by 2.0.51_rc4 he really meant 2.0.53_rc4. :)
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die
Just an addendum to this... it went in, will be available in
2.0.51_rc4 and up.
If you want all registered death funcs to kick in,
EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS="$EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS the_name_of_your_func"
or if you want just your func to run
EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS="the_name_of_your_func"
CC'ing gentoo-dev, since I'd expect some devs would be interested in
it.
~harring
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 11:48:01AM -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 04:33:17PM +, Thomas Matthijs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would really like a way to echo more information when a die happens so
> > the users can paste it in their bug report
> >
> > Only needs a very simple change to ebuild.sh:
> >
> EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS=''
>
> diefunc() {
> local funcname="$1" lineno="$2" exitcode="$3"
> shift 3
> @@ -289,6 +291,7 @@
> echo "!!! ${*:-(no error message)}" >&2
> echo "!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this
> status message." >&2
> echo >&2
> + for x in $EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS; do
> + ${x} "$1" "$2" "$3"
> + done
> exit 1
> }
> ^^^ something like that I think is a bit better; passing the diefunc
> args to the hooks also.
> ~harring
pgpYKG8kcCPsA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Improved ebuild information
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 20:03:54 +0200 Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | I guess I am one of this 'minority'. The question I just want to have | answered, is how the hell are you going to get a system up sanely (and | without tweaking /etc/portage/package.use) if besides the 350 global | USE flags, and the 1200 local USE flags, you now have to worry about | global USE flags meaning different things for every package? Not so big a deal as you might think. For example, the behaviour of the perl, python and ruby USE flags is in general consistent, but some people think you need to turn on those flags to enable editing perl / python / ruby files in Vim. This isn't the case -- the flags handle plugins written *in* the respective languages, not for. So so long as metadata.xml (or whatever) is only used to be more specific than the existing use.*.desc, it's not an issue... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgplGNELBktNf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Improved ebuild information
On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 21:22 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 22:19:39 +0200 Daniel Stiefelmaier > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | I'd like to have a functionality that prints out what the useflags of > | a ebuild are good for. Some are obvious, others are not. Example: > | The useflag "xprint" sounds like printing support, but doesn't tell > | if you need it if you use cups or the kde-printing system or... > | whatever. > > We've discussed adding this to metadata.xml a few times in the past, > but every time there was opposition from a vocal minority of one who > claimed that USE flags should always do exactly the same thing for > every package. > I guess I am one of this 'minority'. The question I just want to have answered, is how the hell are you going to get a system up sanely (and without tweaking /etc/portage/package.use) if besides the 350 global USE flags, and the 1200 local USE flags, you now have to worry about global USE flags meaning different things for every package? As for the 'xprint' USE flags ... I guess the description is deceptive .. its support for X11's printing system (or should be). 'cups' is for cups support, etc. -- Martin Schlemmer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] xfce eclass testing/suggestions
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 10:21 -0400, Daniel Ostrow wrote: > > > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~bcowan/portage.xfce4/ > > > > Looks good to me... > > Also I have all of the modular X deps for XFCE4 enumerated locally in an > overlay on my machine...which changes the deps in the eclass a tad...we > should coordinate on this before you commit it. > GreatI should be on IRC some today, if not please shoot me an email :) -- Brad Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Developer, Gentoo Linuxhttp://www.gentoo.org/~bcowan Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB1F16A56 Key fingerprint = C408 75B9 E68D 26E2 EAAE 20CF 4D5E 293D B1F1 6A56 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] xfce eclass testing/suggestions
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 02:38 -0400, Brad Cowan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just spent this evening working on rewriting a really poor eclass
> that I wrote a year or more ago. I would like some people to test and
> please offer any suggestions for improvement to this so hopefully it can
> get into portage with the next maintenance release. I'm not the best
> when it comes to writing eclasses so if you could help me out with any
> pointers I'd appreciate it. Here's a link to the overlay.
>
> > http://dev.gentoo.org/~bcowan/portage.xfce4/
>
Looks good to me...
Also I have all of the modular X deps for XFCE4 enumerated locally in an
overlay on my machine...which changes the deps in the eclass a tad...we
should coordinate on this before you commit it.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub reiser4
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 09:17 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 10:10 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: > > On 03/10/05, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'd prefer if the patch was left out for amd64 users, or included via a > > > use flag. reiser4 isn't yet stable or proven on amd64. > > > > A quick search found this quote: "The topic in channel #gentoo-amd64 > > on irc.freenode.net has said "Reiser4 is evil" for more than a year." > > > > However http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_AMD_64 and the forum threads it > > links to seem to suggest that people are successfully using reiser4 on > > amd64 with recent kernels? > My suggestion is to > try it. If it works for you, then great. If it doesn't, don't come > asking us, as we'll probably say something like "I told you so." > > Basically, I think it is perfectly fine to play around with reiser4, but > I wouldn't trust it with *my* data. Not yet. > I've been using reiser4 on and off on my amd64 box for ~ 6 months now without any reiser4 related issues. It mainly runs the stable tree aside from a few packages I maintain. Do I trust my data on reiser4? Just as much as I trust ext3, so I keep backups. Which everyone should do regardless of OS/fs type, etc :P -- Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
