Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 04:09:44PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: Slipping this in before 2.1 goes stable, it's a small check. Basically if your ebuild inherits a VCS eclass ( currently darcs, subversion, cvs ) AND your ebuild has stable keywords on any arches repoman will report an error.

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D in the cvs options to always download exactly the same thing. then arent you just adding overhead to the poor gnustep cvs servers ? why not roll a cvs snapshot tarball and distro via our mirrors

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D in the cvs options to always download exactly the same thing. then arent you just adding overhead to the poor gnustep cvs servers

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D in the cvs options to always download exactly the same thing.

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07, Harald van Dijk wrote: Some gnustep stuff inherits cvs, but uses -D

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:14:45AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 02:07,

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 02:24:24AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:14:45AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:45:50AM

Re: [gentoo-dev] Need a use-expanded TV_GRAB variable for xmltv

2006-06-05 Thread Matteo Azzali
The options are just : 1) local flags or 2) expanded var. 3) I've also tried to reuse the LINGUAS expanded flag but is something hackish: not enogh control to the ebuild, people in foreign country can do nothing, there are some issues for country with non-exclusive language (think about

Re: [gentoo-dev] Need a use-expanded TV_GRAB variable for xmltv

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 05 June 2006 06:01, Matteo Azzali wrote: 1) local flags or 2) expanded var. if xmltv is the only package which would benefit from this, then you should use local flags -mike pgplS49zhZlYF.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Need a use-expanded TV_GRAB variable for xmltv

2006-06-05 Thread Matteo Azzali
I already did it , check http://pastebin.com/759475 , but truedfx wrote : Please don't do that. LINGUAS is for translations, nothing more, and using it for xmltv grabbers will be a huge pain for everyone using different languages than implied by their locations. My solution is 3 use flags,

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:56:16 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The devmanual states that they should not generally be added to the | tree softmasked or unmasked. It does not state that they should never | be added as such at all. Or, in other words, there can be exceptions. It's not

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Alec Warner
Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 02:24:24AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 11:14:45AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:54:08AM -0700, Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 10:19:41AM +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 12:57:08PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:56:16 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The devmanual states that they should not generally be added to the | tree softmasked or unmasked. It does not state that they should never | be added

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:41:43 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I then said that *you* say there can be legitimate reasons for them. | So why do *I* have to come up with examples of it? Well that's just it. I didn't say there were legitimate reasons, I just didn't commit myself to

Re: [gentoo-dev] eutils.class fix for make_desktop_entry

2006-06-05 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 00:13 +0200, Alfredo Tupone wrote: Going to apply if I get no negative answer in, say, 10 days. Go ahead and do it now. It really shouldn't break anything, as I can't think of a single thing using make_desktop _entry with a space in the executable name. -- Chris

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:51:31PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:41:43 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I then said that *you* say there can be legitimate reasons for them. | So why do *I* have to come up with examples of it? Well that's just it. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] new repoman check

2006-06-05 Thread Ned Ludd
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 15:16 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 01:51:31PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 14:41:43 +0200 Harald van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I then said that *you* say there can be legitimate reasons for them. | So why do *I* have

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

2006-06-05 Thread Josh Saddler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: [...] Gets my vote. Good idea. :) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEhFG6rsJQqN81j74RAsO1AKCybk+IHs6Bta0Jj/ZCoo2UP3YqZACeNLms bJowAD/7a9ukWOzX+qPVcAo= =a6gy -END PGP SIGNATURE- --

[gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Stefan Schweizer
Hi, today I would like to propose a few default keywords for removal. They are outdated and no longer needed on current systems: -apm - only very old notebooks use apm -foomaticdb - foomaticdb is only used for development foomatic xml files. SInce most of our users do not develop printer drivers

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Grant Goodyear
Stefan Schweizer wrote: [Mon Jun 05 2006, 11:03:57AM CDT] -fortran - Do we really need this outdated language as a default in gcc? Although outdated, there are still a lot of applications that use it. More importantly, there are a lot of well-tested numerical libraries that exist in fortran that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Patrick McLean
Stefan Schweizer wrote: -fortran - Do we really need this outdated language as a default in gcc? I am not on the toolchain team, but I _think_ the reason this is on by default is because fortran is considered part of a standard gcc installation (by upstream, etc). -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 06:03:57PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: Hi, today I would like to propose a few default keywords for removal. They are outdated and no longer needed on current systems: -imlib - imlib depends on gtk-1, which imo should not be installed in a default gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Carsten Lohrke
On Monday 05 June 2006 18:03, Stefan Schweizer wrote: I would like to make the changes in a new 2006.1 profile, how do I go about that? I think the current profiles should not be touched, since some users may still be using the flags. Yes, 2006.1. Any comments/objections - any outdated

Re: [gentoo-dev] eutils.class fix for make_desktop_entry

2006-06-05 Thread Denis Dupeyron
On 6/5/06, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Go ahead and do it now. It really shouldn't break anything, as I can't think of a single thing using make_desktop _entry with a space in the executable name. What about games-board/gnubg-0.14.3 ? Denis. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 06:59:22PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: Any comments/objections - any outdated useflags I forgot? Have a look at /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2006.0/make.defaults for the list of current default use flags. I think gtk2 should be finally removed¹ from all

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread George Shapovalov
Monday, 5. June 2006 18:03, Stefan Schweizer Ви написали: -fortran - Do we really need this outdated language as a default in gcc? Which one, Fortran-99 or Fortran-2006? ;) (Well, Ok, gfortran in gcc does not do 2006 yet, but still..) On the usage side: if you do that (i.e. remove it) you will

Re: [gentoo-dev] removal of cgi-based gwebcache servers

2006-06-05 Thread Jon Hood
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Since no one has shown concern for these poor, frightened packages, they will be humanely removed from portage. - -Jon Jon Hood wrote: If anyone has ever tried to run a gnutella gwebcache, they've probably noticed about 8-10 requests a second. And

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs

2006-06-05 Thread Denis Dupeyron
Denis Dupeyron wrote: dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs will be masked right now, and then removed in a month or so if nobody complains. dev-embedded/sdcc-cvs is now removed. Denis. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: I would like to make the changes in a new 2006.1 profile, how do I go about that? I think the current profiles should not be touched, since some users may still be using the flags. Considering most architectures already have a 2006.1

Re: [gentoo-dev] eutils.class fix for make_desktop_entry

2006-06-05 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 17:24 +, Denis Dupeyron wrote: On 6/5/06, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Go ahead and do it now. It really shouldn't break anything, as I can't think of a single thing using make_desktop _entry with a space in the executable name. What about

[gentoo-dev] Please add net-wireless/rtl818x

2006-06-05 Thread ArYiX
thus package is a branch of the rtl8180-sa2400http://sourceforge.net/projects/rtl818xonly cvsthanks--aryix

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Wernfried Haas
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 07:03:57PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: today I would like to propose a few default keywords for removal. They are outdated and no longer needed on current systems: What do you want to remove, the use flags themselves or just turn them off in the profiles? -xmms -

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Carsten Lohrke
On Monday 05 June 2006 20:08, Harald van Dijk wrote: No, the decision with the gtk/gtk2 USE flag mess was to have package maintainers decide for each ebuild whether to support only gtk1 or only gtk2, but not have support for both in a single ebuild. I know about the decision of the Gnome team,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Carsten Lohrke
On Monday 05 June 2006 20:52, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Have a look at /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2006.0/make.defaults for the list of current default use flags. I think it's a bad idea to have win32codecs in make.defaults. There's quite a number of codecs in the package and I'm

[gentoo-dev] evolution of x86 stabling procedures

2006-06-05 Thread Grant Goodyear
I maintain very few packages these days, so it was quite a surprise to me today when I discovered that peer review is now effectively a part of the x86 stabilization process. When I wrote GLEP 40, the problem that I was trying to solve was that of devs stabling packages without ever testing the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Luis Medinas
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 21:22 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote: On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 07:03:57PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: today I would like to propose a few default keywords for removal. They are outdated and no longer needed on current systems: What do you want to remove, the use flags

Re: [gentoo-dev] evolution of x86 stabling procedures

2006-06-05 Thread Mark Loeser
Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I maintain very few packages these days, so it was quite a surprise to me today when I discovered that peer review is now effectively a part of the x86 stabilization process. When I wrote GLEP 40, the problem that I was trying to solve was that of devs

Re: [gentoo-dev] evolution of x86 stabling procedures

2006-06-05 Thread Bryan Ãstergaard
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 03:00:57PM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote: I maintain very few packages these days, so it was quite a surprise to me today when I discovered that peer review is now effectively a part of the x86 stabilization process. When I wrote GLEP 40, the problem that I was trying to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Wernfried Haas
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 09:58:46PM +0100, Luis Medinas wrote: xmms is still in the tree? People (ok, at least me ;-) ) still use it? I don't mind if it has to go and there are alternatives, but why would you just want to remove its use flag and not the package itself? If it needs to go,

Re: [gentoo-dev] evolution of x86 stabling procedures

2006-06-05 Thread Grant Goodyear
Mark Loeser wrote: [Mon Jun 05 2006, 03:25:02PM CDT] Well, since you decided to bring this up on here, I guess we'll just try to address everything. Where else would I have brought this up? Paraphrasing, I noted that the x86 team is now doing peer review, I asked if other arch teams are doing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 21:57 +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 20:52, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Have a look at /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2006.0/make.defaults for the list of current default use flags. I think it's a bad idea to have win32codecs in

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

2006-06-05 Thread Eldad Zack
On Saturday 03 June 2006 17:43, Alec Warner wrote: I propose a new QA subproject, the TreeCleaners. Great initiative! I'm all for it. For a sidenote, If it is possible, can a unmaintained repo be created for removed packages? If an interested developer comes along the day some time later, and

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

2006-06-05 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
On Tuesday 06 June 2006 00:12, Eldad Zack wrote: If an interested developer comes along the day some time later, and the ebuild is untrivial, it can be a time-saver starting from the last version at some cases - especially if the ebuild was punted because of security issues. That's why we use

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Carsten Lohrke
On Monday 05 June 2006 23:25, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Well, it doesn't affect stages, and GRP stuff is done w/ USE=bindist, so again, this is a non-issue. Well, I didn't mean our binary releases, but being held liable for making property of others available by default, without the permission

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please add net-wireless/rtl818x

2006-06-05 Thread Carsten Lohrke
This list is for development discussions. Please file a request at http://bugs.gentoo.org Carsten pgppRNCcOVLoi.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: -foomaticdb - foomaticdb is only used for development foomatic xml files. SInce most of our users do not develop printer drivers I suggest making ppds a default use flag instead. Should we have ppds in the 2006.1 profile, or

[gentoo-dev] Re: Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Stefan Schweizer
Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: -foomaticdb - foomaticdb is only used for development foomatic xml files. SInce most of our users do not develop printer drivers I suggest making ppds a default use flag instead. Should we have ppds in the

[gentoo-dev] Re: Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, Chris Gianelloni wrote: So does anyone have any objections to the others being removed? (apm imlib mikmod motif xmms) removing mikmod would probably make things ugly for games as well. A lot of games need mikmod support compiled into sdl-mixer in order to function

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 04:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: There are *many* applications in the tree that do not use ALSA, but work only via the OSS emulation. Removing this is a bad idea and it would definitely be blocked by the games team. Probably half of the packages that I maintain

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Andrew Muraco
Carsten Lohrke wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 20:08, Harald van Dijk wrote: No, the decision with the gtk/gtk2 USE flag mess was to have package maintainers decide for each ebuild whether to support only gtk1 or only gtk2, but not have support for both in a single ebuild. I know about

Re: [gentoo-dev] evolution of x86 stabling procedures

2006-06-05 Thread Jason Wever
On Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:00:57 -0500 Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are other arch's also requiring peer review? On SPARC, we normally keyword everything ourselves and get all up in your hizzouze if you keyword something that you haven't asked us about. We normally will let devs keyword

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 05 June 2006 12:16, Patrick McLean wrote: Stefan Schweizer wrote: -fortran - Do we really need this outdated language as a default in gcc? I am not on the toolchain team, but I _think_ the reason this is on by default is because fortran is considered part of a standard gcc

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 05 June 2006 12:03, Stefan Schweizer wrote: -apm -imlib -motif kill em ! -fortran - Do we really need this outdated language as a default in gcc? fortran 4 eva -mike pgpZ84k1Z4HDK.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 05 June 2006 21:23, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: -oss - oss is a legacy audio interface that has been superseeded by alsa in most current installs, a default use flag is no longer needed There are *many* applications in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 12:07:42AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 21:23, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: -oss - oss is a legacy audio interface that has been superseeded by alsa in most current installs, a default use

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default useflag cleanups: -apm -foomaticdb -fortran -imlib -motif -oss -xmms

2006-06-05 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 06 June 2006 01:31, Harald van Dijk wrote: On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 12:07:42AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 05 June 2006 21:23, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 18:03 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: -oss - oss is a legacy audio interface that has been