Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... -mike Seems to work fine here ... Portage 2.0.51.22-r3 (default-linux/x86/2005.1, gcc-3.4.4, glibc-2.3.5-r2, 2.6.14.2 i686) = System uname: 2.6.14.2 i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2400+ Gentoo Base System version 1.6.14 dev-lang/python: 2.3.5-r2, 2.4.2 sys-apps/sandbox:1.2.12 sys-devel/autoconf: 2.13, 2.59-r6 sys-devel/automake: 1.4_p6, 1.5, 1.6.3, 1.7.9-r1, 1.8.5-r3, 1.9.6-r1 sys-devel/binutils: 2.16.1 sys-devel/libtool: 1.5.20 virtual/os-headers: 2.6.11-r2 ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=x86 AUTOCLEAN=yes CBUILD=i686-pc-linux-gnu CFLAGS=-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe CHOST=i686-pc-linux-gnu CONFIG_PROTECT=/etc /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3.4/env /usr/kde/3.4/share/config /usr/kde/3.4/shutdown /usr/kde/3/share/config /usr/lib/X11/xkb /usr/share/config /var/qmail/control CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK=/etc/gconf /etc/terminfo /etc/env.d CXXFLAGS=-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe DISTDIR=/usr/portage/distfiles FEATURES=autoconfig distlocks sandbox sfperms strict GENTOO_MIRRORS=http://gd.tuwien.ac.at/opsys/linux/gentoo/ LANG=en_US.utf8 LC_ALL=en_US.utf8 LINGUAS=de en MAKEOPTS=-j2 PKGDIR=/usr/portage/packages PORTAGE_TMPDIR=/var/tmp PORTDIR=/usr/portage PORTDIR_OVERLAY=/usr/local/portage SYNC=rsync://rsync.europe.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage USE=x86 3dnow 3dnowext X aalib alsa apm audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bzip2 bzlib cdr crypt cups curl dbus dvd dvdr emboss encode esd evo exif expat fam ffmpeg firefox foomaticdb fortran gd gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gphoto2 gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 guile hal idn imagemagick imlib ipv6 java jpeg junit lcms libg++ libwww mad mikmod mmx mmxext mng motif mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nsplugin nvidia ogg oggvorbis opengl oss pam pcre pdflib perl plotutils png python readline recode ruby sdl slang speex spell sqlite sse ssl svga tcltk tcpd tiff truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts udev unicode usb vorbis win32codecs xine xml xml2 xmms xv xvid zlib linguas_de linguas_en userland_GNU kernel_linux elibc_glibc Unset: ASFLAGS, CTARGET, LDFLAGS Matthias -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Commiting of ~arch virtual/* ebuilds causes deptree issues
Hello here, the virtual/ thingy broke the deptree again with virtual/libstdc++ (see Bug 116253), essentially the same issue like with virtual/x11. These virtuals need to go straight stable if any of their RDEPEND atoms is stable for a particular arch. Betelgeuse is working on a repoman check for this issue, meanwhile, if there are more virtuals planned, please bear this in mind. :) Thanks. -- jakub pgpcdJ0bugkrI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Changing description for the xml global use flag
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Better to use the correct list: $ metascan -av IUSE xml IUSE xml2 Generating package list ... done Scanning packages for ['IUSE', 'IUSE'] ... done media-libs/libwmf-0.2.8.3-r1 net-fs/samba-3.0.20-r1 net-fs/samba-3.0.14a-r3 net-fs/samba-3.0.20b net-fs/samba-3.0.14a-r2 net-fs/samba-3.0.20a dev-lang/php-4.3.11-r4 dev-lang/php-4.4.0-r4 dev-lang/php-4.4.1-r2 net-print/pykota-1.22_p1548 net-print/pykota-1.23_p1869-r1 net-print/pykota-1.23_p1874 net-print/pykota-1.23_p1869 net-misc/sitecopy-0.13.4-r2 Marius Both -- net-fs/samba and -- net-print/pykota pratically use xml2, with internal (==package) retrocompatibility checks on the presence of older libraries. Moreover, the xml functionality is used only by a very small percentage of users (and the vast majority of them use xml2). For these packages there should :-) be no issue in unifying the xml and xml2 use flags. Christian -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFDqTijxrlkonpN2woRAj0LAJ0Rbzkda4eZcmScwZw6KeZ3K1xxnwCgpfMH vhbjONuCrlV59HWIsP/5OW4= =/dto -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release, and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Wednesday 21 December 2005 12:49, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release, and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. Got bug numbers? -- Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Linux Developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 07:49:37AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release if you're referring to the multilib issue for amd64/ppc64, then no, that is not in the ebuild yet ... talk to eradicator and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. and almost certainly wont happen, not to mention i'm pretty sure both 1.11.x and 1.12.x are broken in the same regard -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 13:13 +, Roy Marples wrote: On Wednesday 21 December 2005 12:49, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release, and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. Got bug numbers? 57229 99682 I know there's at least one more, but I cannot seem to locate it at this moment. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 14:26 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 07:49:37AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release if you're referring to the multilib issue for amd64/ppc64, then no, that is not in the ebuild yet ... talk to eradicator That's the one. Have the bug # for it? and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. and almost certainly wont happen, not to mention i'm pretty sure both 1.11.x and 1.12.x are broken in the same regard -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 09:30:56AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 13:13 +, Roy Marples wrote: On Wednesday 21 December 2005 12:49, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release, and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. Got bug numbers? 57229 not an issue with baselayout, lvm code has been moved to the lvm ebuild 99682 that bug is still waiting for feedback from you releng peeps :P -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 14:45 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 09:30:56AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 13:13 +, Roy Marples wrote: On Wednesday 21 December 2005 12:49, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 14:36 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Does this preclude any bug fixes going into 1.11 that affect the release? I have at least two that I would love to get resolved before 2006.0's release, and waiting for the eventual stabilization of 1.12 isn't exactly the best plan for this. Got bug numbers? 57229 not an issue with baselayout, lvm code has been moved to the lvm ebuild OK. 99682 that bug is still waiting for feedback from you releng peeps :P Ehh... what is needed from us? I don't see anything asking us for more information (and have commented as such on the bug). -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Portage 2.0.53 now stable on x86
I just marked 2.0.53 stable on x86. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108082 for details. You can check the various dependencies of this bug for the bug fixes that went into this release. This release includes at least one new program. pena jamvm # emaint --help usage: emaint [options] all | world Currently emaint can only check and fix problems with one's world file. Future versions will integrate other portage check-and-fix tools and provide a single interface to system health checks. options: -h, --help show this help message and exit -c, --check check for problems -f, --fixattempt to fix problems Regards, Petteri Räty (Betelgeuse) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.14 stabilization
since we have baselayout-1.12.x in ~arch, the new stable candidate (1.11.14) isnt getting much air time ... can people try upgrading to it and post any feedback they have with it ? it should mostly be a bugfix release over 1.11.13 since we arent doing any more real features for the 1.11.x branch ... Looking good here on a stable x86 system. The only thing that I noted is that =sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r3 will have to go stable at the same time due to it being a dependency. Regards, Paul -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Commiting of ~arch virtual/* ebuilds causes deptree issues
Jakub Moc wrote: the virtual/ thingy broke the deptree again with virtual/libstdc++ (see Bug 116253), essentially the same issue like with virtual/x11. These virtuals need to go straight stable if any of their RDEPEND atoms is stable for a particular arch. Shouldn't it be the reverse? Rather, they need to go stable if anything depending on them is stable. IOW, it doesn't matter if an ~arch virtual depends on stable packages. It matters if stable packages depend on an ~arch virtual. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Commiting of ~arch virtual/* ebuilds causes deptree issues
On Wednesday 21 December 2005 19:28, Donnie Berkholz wrote: IOW, it doesn't matter if an ~arch virtual depends on stable packages. It matters if stable packages depend on an ~arch virtual. So that's like any other package in the tree.. -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE pgpQN3kxkxvdl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Commiting of ~arch virtual/* ebuilds causes deptree issues
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hello here, the virtual/ thingy broke the deptree again with virtual/libstdc++ (see Bug 116253), essentially the same issue like with virtual/x11. These virtuals need to go straight stable if any of their RDEPEND atoms is stable for a particular arch. Betelgeuse is working on a repoman check for this issue, meanwhile, if there are more virtuals planned, please bear this in mind. :) It makes no sense to make a check to verify what seems to be broken behaviour. The virtuals should be like any other ebuild in the tree. -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgp90fZ5xFG92.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage 2.0.53 now stable on x86 and amd64
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 19:25 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: I just marked 2.0.53 stable on x86. See http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108082 for details. You can check the various dependencies of this bug for the bug fixes that went into this release. This release includes at least one new program. pena jamvm # emaint --help usage: emaint [options] all | world Currently emaint can only check and fix problems with one's world file. Future versions will integrate other portage check-and-fix tools and provide a single interface to system health checks. options: -h, --help show this help message and exit -c, --check check for problems -f, --fixattempt to fix problems Regards, Petteri Räty (Betelgeuse) Following this post... i marked portage 2.0.53 stable on amd64 too... happy upgrade! -- Luis Medinas [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dev.gentoo.org/~metalgod Gentoo Linux Developer: AMD64,Printing,Media-Optical,Sound -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] 2006 and ebuild headers
# Copyright 1999-2005 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 # $Header: $ I remember last year the mirror system having problems when some people went and changed tons of ebuild headers. What I don't remember is if we set some kind of policy then, but best to put this issue on the table well before New Year so that everyone will be aware of what to do when the time comes. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Tcl/Tk correction
I've noticed wrong homepage specified for tclpython (shoud be http://jfontain.free.fr/tclpython.htm ) gevad ~ # emerge -s tclpython Searching... [ Results for search key : tclpython ] [ Applications found : 1 ] * dev-tcltk/tclpython Latest version available: 3.1 Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ] Size of downloaded files: 6 kB Homepage:http://jfontain.free.fr/tclperl.htm Description: a Python package for Tcl License: GPL-2 Also, I want Perl module for Tcl/Tk interconnection to be available within as ebuild. Module is named Tcl::Tk, placed on CPAN, similar to perl/Tk, small and easy. I'll do all needed work myself. Could you please advice whom to contact? Where is FAQ for me to read? Thanks in advance. Vadim. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tcl/Tk correction
Vadim Konovalov [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I've noticed wrong homepage specified for tclpython (shoud be http://jfontain.free.fr/tclpython.htm ) Please file a bug on https://bugs.gentoo.org Also, I want Perl module for Tcl/Tk interconnection to be available within as ebuild. Module is named Tcl::Tk, placed on CPAN, similar to perl/Tk, small and easy. I'll do all needed work myself. Could you please advice whom to contact? Where is FAQ for me to read? File a bug about this as well :) -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgpRHOZ26sJi9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tcl/Tk correction
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 11:36:43PM +0300, Vadim Konovalov wrote: I've noticed wrong homepage specified for tclpython (shoud be http://jfontain.free.fr/tclpython.htm ) use http://bugs.gentoo.org/ Also, I want Perl module for Tcl/Tk interconnection to be available within as ebuild. use http://bugs.gentoo.org/ -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] tcltk splitting [again]
came someone please remind me why we havent split the tcltk USE flag into tcl and tk ? wanting tcl support on a server makes sense, and doing something like 'tcltk? ( X? ( tk ) )' is just dumb -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Viability of other SCM/version control systems for big repo's
Donnie Berkholz wrote: I know some of you have done research on how gentoo-x86 converts over to other systems besides CVS such as SVN, arch, etc. But I can't find the info anywhere in my archives. Could whoever's got it, post it? I'm particularly interested in hearing about CVS, SVN, mercurial, bazaar, darcs. I've downloaded a copy of the gentoo-x86 repo and will run tests myself. Please advise me as to exactly which tests you would like to see, beyond whatever I feel like doing. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] New Developer: Peter Volkov
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All- Please take a moment to welcome our newest developer, pva. Peter is joining to help out with netmon. In his own words, I was born in Moscow (it's in Russia). I graduated physical department of Moscow State University. And my speciality is physicist. Now I'm second year PHD student in A.M. Prokhorov General Physics Institute Russian Academy of Sciences. But that is not the whole truth. :) I'm learning in High Computer School also in Moscow State University. Well. I think no one be surprised if I say that gentoo is my favorite distribution. ;) Why? Just ordinary two sentence story. :) I lived some time with LFS and really enjoyed it. The only problem I found there was the absence of automation of package management. So when I found gentoo it was exactly what I want! Great! Thank you all. I hope I could help you a bit. :) - -- === Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead PGP Key: 0xA797C7A7 Gentoo Developer Relations ===GPG Fingerprint=== 0094 7F06 913E 78D6 F1BB 06BA D0AD D125 A797 C7A7 === -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDqcjj0K3RJaeXx6cRAn4YAJwOYuMFQ9PBwI4QlDwiJa7etVGOZwCfQ8a8 sSYNH5N9NBPzKBthWxHfKwY= =3jia -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Peter Volkov
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:28:03PM -0600, Mike Doty wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All- Please take a moment to welcome our newest developer, pva. Peter is joining to help out with netmon. Time to start a Russian conspiracy! Dobro pozhalovat'. -- Renat Lumpau all things web-apps GPG key id #C6A838DA on http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint = 04AF B5EE 17CB 1000 DDA5 D3FC 1338 ADC2 C6A8 38DA pgpFAaPBhLGOV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] tcltk splitting [again]
Um, I cannot remind why we did not split, because I remember (unless I am hallucinating of course. That was like 2 years ago, or more..) that we actually had them split and then they were joined.. For whatever it is worth.. As for reasons, not really sure, did not check at the time (as I did not deal much with them). I guess in that general sweep of trying to make use flags manageable.. George On Wednesday, 21. December 2005 21:47, Mike Frysinger wrote: came someone please remind me why we havent split the tcltk USE flag into tcl and tk ? wanting tcl support on a server makes sense, and doing something like 'tcltk? ( X? ( tk ) )' is just dumb -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] tcltk splitting [again]
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 11:24:10PM +0100, George Shapovalov wrote: Um, I cannot remind why we did not split, because I remember (unless I am hallucinating of course. That was like 2 years ago, or more..) that we actually had them split and then they were joined.. For whatever it is worth.. i cant say i ever remember them being sep ... afaik, they've always been one USE flag ... but viewcvs says that we had a tcl and a tcltk rather than a tcl and tk flag ... -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Peter Volkov
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:28:03 -0600 Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All- Please take a moment to welcome our newest developer, pva. Peter is joining to help out with netmon. In his own words, I was born in Moscow (it's in Russia). I graduated physical department of Moscow State University. And my speciality is physicist. Now I'm second year PHD student in A.M. Prokhorov General Physics Institute Russian Academy of Sciences. But that is not the whole truth. :) I'm learning in High Computer School also in Moscow State University. Well. I think no one be surprised if I say that gentoo is my favorite distribution. ;) Why? Just ordinary two sentence story. :) I lived some time with LFS and really enjoyed it. The only problem I found there was the absence of automation of package management. So when I found gentoo it was exactly what I want! Great! Thank you all. I hope I could help you a bit. :) Perhaps just a coincidence, but isn't this the same Peter Volkov who wrote the Volkov Commander, which I loved and used daily back in my MS-DOS (gaming) days? Kind regards, -- Andrej Ticho Kacian ticho at gentoo dot org Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, sound, x86 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Commiting of ~arch virtual/* ebuilds causes deptree issues
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Hello here, the virtual/ thingy broke the deptree again with virtual/libstdc++ (see Bug 116253), essentially the same issue like with virtual/x11. These virtuals need to go straight stable if any of their RDEPEND atoms is stable for a particular arch. Just to let everyone know, this is not the case. Treat it like a normal ebuild and everything will be fine. If your new real virtual is already an existing virtual used by stable packages, it will of course need to go stable, but if its brand new, just make sure nothing stable depends on it. Bug #116253 was invalid due to the user's package.keywords. Thanks, -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgpMtOHkrFQ12.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Changing description for the xml global use flag
On Tuesday 20 December 2005 02:55, Duncan wrote: What about doing with xml what was done with gtk, when gtk2 was deprecated? IOW, where both are possible, default to one or the other, which ever one is merged, or choose one (preferably making it a Gentoo-wide default, for consistency) if both or neither are merged. not really needed seeing as how very few (well pretty much no) packages offer both xml and xml2 support ive started a bug here for those who wish to follow progress: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116346 -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Annoying X.Org tarball naming (and how to deal with it)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'd appreciate some ideas better than what I've come up with so far to deal with the very strange X.Org release naming. When modular tarballs are part of a full X.Org release (7.0, 7.1, etc), then they are named PN-PV-XORG_RELEASE.tar.(gz|bz2) and S matches. When modular tarballs are independently released outside a full X.Org release, they are named the standard way -- PN-PV.tar.(gz|bz2), same for S. Dealing with this all in an automated fashion in x-modular.eclass is somewhat difficult, and here's what I've come up with: A variable (XORG_PV), set by the ebuild, to tell _which_ release it's part of when it is part of a full release. If it's set, that means (1) it is part of a full release and (2) indicates which release it's part of. What does this mean for the future? All modular X ebuilds that are part of a full release will require XORG_PV to be set. All modular X ebuilds that aren't part of a full release will not require anything new. I'm doing it this way because I expect there to be more packages that aren't part of a full release than ones that are. Please give me your input on this. Thanks, Donnie -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDqjr2XVaO67S1rtsRAhlPAKCMvjj82U6sNPpVYsUOnKOsRwAF4QCgibKM Ccs1TnSQbXI66BVpf4P8Ed4= =NFr1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Viability of other SCM/version control systems for big repo's
On 12/21/05, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Donnie Berkholz wrote: I know some of you have done research on how gentoo-x86 converts over to other systems besides CVS such as SVN, arch, etc. But I can't find the info anywhere in my archives. Could whoever's got it, post it? I'm particularly interested in hearing about CVS, SVN, mercurial, bazaar, darcs. I've downloaded a copy of the gentoo-x86 repo and will run tests myself. Please advise me as to exactly which tests you would like to see, beyond whatever I feel like doing. might i also suggest testing out git along with the above listed? since i dont know git well enuf or what exactly are requirements of a gentoo dev ill just point to some documents tutorial can be found here: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/tutorial.html and documention here: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Viability of other SCM/version control systems for big repo's
* Bret Towe [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-12-21 23:16]: On 12/21/05, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Donnie Berkholz wrote: I know some of you have done research on how gentoo-x86 converts over to other systems besides CVS such as SVN, arch, etc. But I can't find the info anywhere in my archives. Could whoever's got it, post it? I'm particularly interested in hearing about CVS, SVN, mercurial, bazaar, darcs. I've downloaded a copy of the gentoo-x86 repo and will run tests myself. Please advise me as to exactly which tests you would like to see, beyond whatever I feel like doing. might i also suggest testing out git along with the above listed? since i dont know git well enuf or what exactly are requirements of a gentoo dev ill just point to some documents tutorial can be found here: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/tutorial.html and documention here: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/ I know that some people have big reservations on distributed SCMs, but why not switch to a distributed format, and cherry pick from other developer's (and users) repositories? Git allows for pushing to a centralized server, so it still 'works' in a similar sense of committing changes to CVS. cg-branch-add gentoo-main git+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ cg-push gentoo-main -Ryan pgpHNai8r5qPL.pgp Description: PGP signature
