[gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
Hi, Borg hasn't been updated in portage for a while despite the fact that new versions were released over a year ago (see http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=184699 ). Therefor I suggest app-office/borg gets removed from portage. Regards, Aniruddha
[gentoo-dev] unwanted CVS keyword substitution on patch files
Every once in a while, I get bitten by the $Id keyword replacement done on patches in $FILESDIR. Can we do something to fix this annoyance? If repoman cannot add -kb for *.patch and *.diff files, at least it should verify you have added those files with this options. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: unwanted CVS keyword substitution on patch files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alin Năstac wrote: Every once in a while, I get bitten by the $Id keyword replacement done on patches in $FILESDIR. Can we do something to fix this annoyance? If repoman cannot add -kb for *.patch and *.diff files, at least it should verify you have added those files with this options. Yes, we can fix that. The code to identify which ones were added with -kb is already there. We just have to make it search for the $Id keyword in all the new/updated files and filter out any that have the -kb flag set. I guess we could have it bail out in that case or else re-add it with the -kb flag set. - -- Thanks, Zac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkimsQcACgkQ/ejvha5XGaMLNQCgizBZYN8oJRvB4La9qAWbnJWy T/UAoOe5m+OaHR5TIo6vIWllX3ezzgBs =uaiP -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 09:17:10 +0200 Aniruddha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Borg hasn't been updated in portage for a while despite the fact that new versions were released over a year ago (see http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=184699 ). Therefor I suggest app-office/borg gets removed from portage. Why not put together an ebuild for a recent version? If there are no major changes, an ebuild will probably get it updated quickly enough, in my experience. Rob.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
On Sat, 2008-08-16 at 19:30 +0100, Robert Bridge wrote: On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 09:17:10 +0200 Aniruddha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Borg hasn't been updated in portage for a while despite the fact that new versions were released over a year ago (see http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=184699 ). Therefor I suggest app-office/borg gets removed from portage. Why not put together an ebuild for a recent version? If there are no major changes, an ebuild will probably get it updated quickly enough, in my experience. Rob. I've filed the bugreport (version bump) a year ago. It looks like borg has no maintainer. Regards, Aniruddha
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:42:35 +0200 Aniruddha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've filed the bugreport (version bump) a year ago. It looks like borg has no maintainer. So maintain it. You don't need to be a dev to write an ebuild, and there are enough devs who are happy to throw an eye over user donated ebuilds and commit them to the tree... Removing a package from portage simply because no one has commited the up-to-date version you want is silly. If the only problem is no version bumping, provide the ebuild. Someone will commit it. I've done that for a few packages, it's not hard. I don't know anything about borg specifically, but as a user, I would not want to see packages being removed from portage just because the devs are too busy to write version bump ebuilds. Rob.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
It can be somewhat difficult to find someone to look over and commit an ebuild on an unmaintained package though - the several times i've done that have involved tracking down developers with previous commits to the package or who are active in the category and trying to find one who isn't retired (I have good taste in packages, apparently - high turnover :P). On one, I had to talk to 7 different developers before I found someone willing and able to help. Just adding to the bug probably won't help unless it's assigned to someone - take a look at it's changelog (/usr/portage/category/package/Changelog) and try to get in touch with specific people if nobody responds to the tracker. Random idea: How about a different bug assignee for maintainer-needed packages with provided ebuilds/patches? Either something generic, or try to go for something more category/package specific (herds, etc). Lots of work for bugwranglers, though. There is a huge difference to developers between an unmaintained package with no progress and just looking over an ebuild that has been used successfully by several people. - John Brooks On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Robert Bridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:42:35 +0200 Aniruddha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've filed the bugreport (version bump) a year ago. It looks like borg has no maintainer. So maintain it. You don't need to be a dev to write an ebuild, and there are enough devs who are happy to throw an eye over user donated ebuilds and commit them to the tree... Removing a package from portage simply because no one has commited the up-to-date version you want is silly. If the only problem is no version bumping, provide the ebuild. Someone will commit it. I've done that for a few packages, it's not hard. I don't know anything about borg specifically, but as a user, I would not want to see packages being removed from portage just because the devs are too busy to write version bump ebuilds. Rob.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robert Bridge wrote: On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:42:35 +0200 Aniruddha [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've filed the bugreport (version bump) a year ago. It looks like borg has no maintainer. So maintain it. You don't need to be a dev to write an ebuild, and there are enough devs who are happy to throw an eye over user donated ebuilds and commit them to the tree... And then there's the sunrise overlay [1]. Cheers, Arun [1] http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkinH2UACgkQ+Vqt1inD4uyUHQCfTtssO+sJ7DO3LB2acCvRoqAS znQAoI3eDIJQmDYcsoNfQNIQGHEIhUN6 =qewP -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2
As per glep 42 (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0042.html) here is the required email for a new news item. This news item is important because otherwise users will be missing updates to the system set if they continue updating their system with the usual emerge --update --deep world. Unless objections come out the new news item will be committed at the same time as rc8 (rc8 will have an update man portage page describing world_sets). Title: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2 Author: Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Author: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2008-XX-XX Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc8 As of Portage 2.2 the world set does not include the system set any more. If you want emerge --update --deep @world to update the system set too, you need to add @system to the new world_sets file in /var/lib/portage/. For more information on world_sets see man portage. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:39:41PM +0300, Petteri R??ty wrote: Title: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2 Author: Petteri R??ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Author: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2008-XX-XX Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc8 As of Portage 2.2 the world set does not include the system set any more. If you want emerge --update --deep @world to update the system set too, you need to add @system to the new world_sets file in /var/lib/portage/. For more information on world_sets see man portage. This brings up a question. I have been doing updates this way: emerge -NDu @installed Does that do the same thing? Thanks, - -- William Hubbs gentoo accessibility team lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkinguMACgkQblQW9DDEZTiwZgCff3r0XtUR2iGGswpfTkWxEQcp xisAoKZDrcjbh9T1SikiaASpyqqEKq/A =e9j2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2
2008-08-17 03:46:11 William Hubbs napisał(a): On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 10:39:41PM +0300, Petteri R??ty wrote: Title: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2 Author: Petteri R??ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Author: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2008-XX-XX Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc8 As of Portage 2.2 the world set does not include the system set any more. If you want emerge --update --deep @world to update the system set too, you need to add @system to the new world_sets file in /var/lib/portage/. For more information on world_sets see man portage. This brings up a question. I have been doing updates this way: emerge -NDu @installed Does that do the same thing? No. @installed set contains all installed packages. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 William Hubbs wrote: As of Portage 2.2 the world set does not include the system set any more. If you want emerge --update --deep @world to update the system set too, you need to add @system to the new world_sets file in /var/lib/portage/. For more information on world_sets see man portage. This brings up a question. I have been doing updates this way: emerge -NDu @installed Does that do the same thing? It's mostly the same, except for things that are eligible for removal by emerge --depclean. I advise people to use @world and @system instead of @installed whenever possible since @installed makes it impossible for emerge to solve blockers by automatic uninstallation of blocked packages [1]. I've recently updated the documentation to warn about this undesirable side-effect [2]. [1] http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/zmedico/2008/05/09/blocking_package_file_collisions [2] http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage?view=revrev=11318 - -- Thanks, Zac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkinlvwACgkQ/ejvha5XGaOv3gCgvdPJY/Nl8Hoxou12Kp2bw7jQ 6r0AnjiYH/yHs3aC5W9k8KE4f1ySDtLX =p+ib -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Re: Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.
Arun Raghavan [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 17 Aug 2008 00:11:41 +0530: And then there's the sunrise overlay [1]. Yes, but sunrise doesn't (didn't?) take any packages already in the tree. If it's not getting updated in-tree, however, and the only block from it being in sunrise is that it's in-tree already (that is, there's someone already actively willing to work with it in sunrise, and only can't because it's in-tree), then that could be support for removing it from the tree. But better than that would be finding a dev to proxy-maintain it in the tree, since the above assumes a user already willing to do the real work. The difference is in-tree with a named proxy-maintainer, or in- sunrise with the sunrise devs acting as proxies. Since in-tree is higher visibility and availability, that's definitely preferred, and if it's already in-tree, the only blocker is then finding someone to be that named proxy-maintainer. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman
