[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] SVN/CVS temporarily down for CIAbot debugging

2007-05-18 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 10:48:37PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
 CVS and SVN are temporarily offline while I figure out why bug #169930
 has come back and broken stuff.
Ok, CVS+SVN are available again now.

Majority of the failure was caused by NSCD failing at some point, and
thus causing the quantity of LDAP passwd db lookups to have frequent
failures.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer  Council Member
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85


pgpZilMpN60OS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] distcc and precompiled headers

2007-05-18 Thread Caleb Tennis
Based on some recent findings, it looks like the two above mentioned features 
don't
work together.  pch don't get distributed to distcc nodes, so they're basically
mutually exclusive.  However, distcc is a FEATURE and pch are a USE flag.

Should we just put a check in each ebuild that uses the pch use flag, make an
eclass, or build something into the package manager(s) ?  Thoughts?

Caleb

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] distcc and precompiled headers

2007-05-18 Thread Luca Barbato
Caleb Tennis wrote:
 Based on some recent findings, it looks like the two above mentioned features 
 don't
 work together.  pch don't get distributed to distcc nodes, so they're 
 basically
 mutually exclusive.  However, distcc is a FEATURE and pch are a USE flag.
 
 Should we just put a check in each ebuild that uses the pch use flag, make an
 eclass, or build something into the package manager(s) ?  Thoughts?

Enhance distcc?

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato

Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



[gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-servers/boa

2007-05-18 Thread Raúl Porcel
# Raúl Porcel armin76 at gentoo dot org (18 May 2007)
# For treecleaners, bug 102174
# Pending removal 17 Jul 2007
www-servers/boa
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] add built_with_use_die() to eutils.eclass ?

2007-05-18 Thread Doug Goldstein
Petteri Räty wrote:
 Marius Mauch kirjoitti:
   
 On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 23:45:48 +0200
 dju` [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 eerror Your ${package} package has been built without
 eerror ${func} support, please enable the '${use_flag}' USE flag 
 and
 eerror re-emerge ${package}.
 elog You can enable this USE flag either globally in 
 /etc/make.conf,
 elog or just for specific packages in /etc/portage/package.use.
 die ${package} missing ${func} support
   
 A little detail about elog: You should not use different elog functions
 (eerror, elog, ewarn, ...) within the same message as they may appear
 out of order in the final log (e.g. the elog lines might appear before
 the eerror lines). This is because messages of the same loglevel and in
 the same phase are grouped together. It's an implementation detail that
 might be changed in future versions, but for now you'll have to live
 with it.

 Also I don't see much use in explaining how to enable a use flag inside
 ebuilds, at most there should be a pointer to the real documentation
 IMO.

 Marius
 

 Any updates on this?

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/portage/eclass $ grep built_with_use_die -r .
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/portage/eclass $

 I for one would use it if it existed.

 Regards,
 Petteri

   
built_with_use sys-apps/pciutils zlib  die You need to build
sys-apps/pciutils without zlib

WHY do we need YET another function for such a simple construct?

built_with_use is already available and very powerful.

For example, HAL does..

built_with_use --missing false sys-apps/pciutils zlib

If the USE flag is missing entirely, it'll treat it like it's disabled
because old versions didn't have the zlib USE flag and didn't gzip their
data. Some packages it might be the other way around so you can pass
true instead.

Adding built_with_use_die is utterly pointless.

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



[gentoo-dev] Re: stabilizing expat 2.0.0

2007-05-18 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Carsten Lohrke wrote:
  the amd64 team is unresponsive on even trivial stabilisation
  request form the KDE team as well, lately.
 
 welp's been away ;)

 welp does not touch KDE packages...

V-Li

-- 
http://www.gentoo.org/
http://www.faulhammer.org/
http://www.gnupg.org/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Re: stabilizing expat 2.0.0

2007-05-18 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

   You will get them tomorrow...promised. :)  Too many bugs, not
  enough devs...as always.
 Well, I've offered my help with the amd64 team three times now. Was 
 ignored two times and the third time an initial discussion lead to 
 nowhere so I guess it's not exactly of getting more devs but wanting 
 them - or not.

 Hmmm, I don't know how you did it, but I just nagged some people for
a day and was in it...and that was just a few weeks ago.

V-Li 

-- 
http://www.gentoo.org/
http://www.faulhammer.org/
http://www.gnupg.org/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stabilizing expat 2.0.0

2007-05-18 Thread Raúl Porcel
Christian Faulhammer wrote:
 Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 
  You will get them tomorrow...promised. :)  Too many bugs, not
 enough devs...as always.
 Well, I've offered my help with the amd64 team three times now. Was 
 ignored two times and the third time an initial discussion lead to 
 nowhere so I guess it's not exactly of getting more devs but wanting 
 them - or not.
 
  Hmmm, I don't know how you did it, but I just nagged some people for
 a day and was in it...and that was just a few weeks ago.
 
 V-Li 
 

That's because they want you to do the java bugs *g*
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list