Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch

2014-07-06 Thread hasufell
Greg KH: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 04:15:55PM +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote: On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:25:27 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Agree 100%. I'm taking about masking things that HAVEN'T BEEN TESTED AT ALL. The maintainer knows that they compile, and that is it. Developers

Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch

2014-07-06 Thread William Hubbs
On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 01:07:18PM +, hasufell wrote: If you are talking about actually testing and running the software then that's a different story and definitely not within our scope when committing to ~arch. That said, I think it's a reasonable minimum to at least check if an

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2014-07-06 23h59 UTC

2014-07-06 Thread Robin H. Johnson
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2014-07-06 23h59 UTC. Removals: sci-biology/ncbi-tools++2014-06-30 08:04:50 mrueg perl-core/Class-ISA 2014-07-05 12:40:44 dilfridge

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Add support for travis ci

2014-07-06 Thread Manuel RĂ¼ger
This patch adds support for travis continuous integration. Example output: https://travis-ci.org/mrueg/portage/builds/29268364 Cheers Manuel From 3bee849868cf53fb5814f81fa368e91b59f7220b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Manuel=20R=C3=BCger?= mr...@gentoo.org Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014