[gentoo-dev] Suggestion: remove app-office/borg from portage.

2008-08-16 Thread Aniruddha
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

2008-08-16 Thread Alin Năstac
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

2008-08-16 Thread Zac Medico
-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.

2008-08-16 Thread Robert Bridge
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.

2008-08-16 Thread Aniruddha
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.

2008-08-16 Thread Robert Bridge
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.

2008-08-16 Thread John Brooks
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.

2008-08-16 Thread Arun Raghavan
-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

2008-08-16 Thread Petteri Räty
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

2008-08-16 Thread William Hubbs
-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

2008-08-16 Thread Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
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

2008-08-16 Thread Zac Medico
-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.

2008-08-16 Thread Duncan
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