-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
# Brian Evans grkni...@gentoo.org (02 Feb 2015)
# Last rites bug 538584
# =dev-lang/php-5.4 no longer includes the extension needed
# In preparation of dev-lang/php:5.3 removal, Removal in 30 days
dev-php/PEAR-MDB2_Driver_sqlite
-BEGIN PGP
El sáb, 31-01-2015 a las 16:48 -0500, Anthony G. Basile escribió:
Hi everyone,
We need to revert the following change to toolchain.eclass:
http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/eclass/toolchain.eclass?r1=1.647r2=1.648
It turns out that bsd and prefix need fixincludes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02.02.2015 22:58, Brian Dolbec wrote:
sys-apps/portage-2.2.16 is ready for release and is just waiting
for the news announcement about the new plug-in sync system being
used and the changes in it's operation.
Attached is the news
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
sys-apps/portage-2.2.16 is ready for release and is just waiting for the
news announcement about the new plug-in sync system being used and the
changes in it's operation.
Attached is the news announcement for review.
- --
Brian Dolbec dolsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
sys-apps/portage-2.2.16 is ready for release and is just waiting for the
news announcement about the new plug-in sync system being used and the
changes in it's operation.
Attached is the news announcement for review.
- --
Brian Dolbec dolsen
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 19:24:38 -0500
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org
wrote:
sys-apps/portage-2.2.16 is ready for release and is just waiting
for the news announcement about the new plug-in sync system being
used and the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 23:21:53 +0100
Manuel Rüger mr...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02.02.2015 22:58, Brian Dolbec wrote:
sys-apps/portage-2.2.16 is ready for release and is just waiting
for the
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 15:06:40
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
The idea is that instead of having USE=libav (that's tangential to
USE=ffmpeg and confusing) to use a USE_EXPAND like FFMPEG_IMPL taking
either ffmpeg or libav. Now, why...
Ok, since this is going to be a long night,
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote:
sys-apps/portage-2.2.16 is ready for release and is just waiting for the
news announcement about the new plug-in sync system being used and the
changes in it's operation.
Attached is the news announcement for review.
You
Michał Górny posted on Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:06:40 +0100 as excerpted:
FFMPEG_IMPL feels like a natural extension of USE=ffmpeg. USE=ffmpeg
tells to use ffmpeg or a replacement, FFMPEG_IMPL tells what will
exactly get used. Much less confusion.
+1
Thirdly, this opens space for having more
On 02/02/2015 05:47 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
For feature flag, name is the only issue. Currently USE=ffmpeg serves
that purpose and I think changing that would have a very high cost
(and cause a lot of bikeshed), esp. if we would end up reusing the flag
for another purpose. So most likely
Il 02/02/2015 23:30, Pacho Ramos ha scritto:
El sáb, 31-01-2015 a las 16:48 -0500, Anthony G. Basile escribió:
Hi everyone,
We need to revert the following change to toolchain.eclass:
http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/eclass/toolchain.eclass?r1=1.647r2=1.648
It turns
Note: not a Gentoo dev, just a confused user
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote:
Note:
If you have default portage settings for location, sync-type then
it should use the backup defaults and sync the gentoo repo still.
What are the
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Michał Górny wrote:
FFMPEG_IMPL feels like a natural extension of USE=ffmpeg. USE=ffmpeg
tells to use ffmpeg or a replacement, FFMPEG_IMPL tells what will
exactly get used. Much less confusion.
Thirdly, this opens space for having more than two different
implementations
Cool.
However, this should be done in a revbump, so that we do not rely on
dynamic deps. And it's reasonable to assume that people want to update
for this change.
Hans de Graaff (graaff):
graaff 15/01/19 20:07:18
Modified: ruby-1.9.3_p551.ebuild ruby-2.2.0.ebuild
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 10:46:34
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On Sun, 1 Feb 2015, I wrote:
On Sun, 1 Feb 2015, Michał Górny wrote:
+ local restore_umask=:
+ if [[ ${EVCS_UMASK} ]]; then
+ restore_umask=$(umask -p)
+
Hi, everyone.
Just after the news item got published, user Wes mailed me with
a suggestion. While I think someone mentioned it earlier
in the bikesheds over ffmpeg, I have completely forgotten about it
and now I'd like to reconsider it. For this reason, I've reverted
the news item while it's
On Sun, 1 Feb 2015, I wrote:
On Sun, 1 Feb 2015, Michał Górny wrote:
+ local restore_umask=:
+ if [[ ${EVCS_UMASK} ]]; then
+ restore_umask=$(umask -p)
+ umask ${EVCS_UMASK} || die Bad options to umask:
${EVCS_UMASK}
+ fi
On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 14:40:47 +0100
Agostino Sarubbo a...@gentoo.org wrote:
Looks like everyone is file stable requests with own
rules or better to say is without common rules.
What is the problem?
I'd like to document a sort of best-practice(s) on
our wiki.
Who want to partecipate?
On 02/02/2015 09:12 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
What are your thoughts?
In a nutshell, you have a binary choice here, namely ffmpeg or libav
as implementation, and instead of one USE flag you want to introduce
two (ffmpeg_impl_ffmpeg and ffmpeg_impl_libav), but of the 4 possible
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 10:44:46
Michael Orlitzky m...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On 02/02/2015 09:12 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
What are your thoughts?
In a nutshell, you have a binary choice here, namely ffmpeg or libav
as implementation, and instead of one USE flag you want to
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 08:54:04
Gordon Pettey petteyg...@gmail.com napisał(a):
Having USE=ffmpeg at all is the source of any confusion in case somebody
is using libav. Either with an expand set (which seems wasted just for two
options) or two regular flags, just force one or none. There is
Having USE=ffmpeg at all is the source of any confusion in case somebody
is using libav. Either with an expand set (which seems wasted just for two
options) or two regular flags, just force one or none. There is absolutely
no sense in having USE=ffmpeg on for a system using libav.
On Mon, Feb 2,
On 02/02/2015 10:50 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Maybe. Though it still will keep the confusion of !libav meaning ffmpeg.
We could remove USE=libav from the tree, leaving only USE=ffmpeg. Then
ffmpeg_impl_libav would switch the implementation if USE=ffmpeg is enabled.
Maybe a little cleaner
On 02/02/2015 09:06 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Hi, everyone.
Just after the news item got published, user Wes mailed me with
a suggestion. While I think someone mentioned it earlier
in the bikesheds over ffmpeg, I have completely forgotten about it
and now I'd like to reconsider it. For this
On 3 February 2015 at 00:00, Michael Orlitzky m...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 02/02/2015 10:50 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Maybe. Though it still will keep the confusion of !libav meaning ffmpeg.
We could remove USE=libav from the tree, leaving only USE=ffmpeg. Then
ffmpeg_impl_libav would switch the
On Tue, 3 Feb 2015, Ben de Groot wrote:
Please restore the news item and unmask the revbumps, so we can get on
with business. :)
+1
pgpf349IEiEzV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 17:14:22 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
In a nutshell, you have a binary choice here, namely ffmpeg or
libav as implementation, and instead of one USE flag you want to
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 15:12:50 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
What are your thoughts?
In a nutshell, you have a binary choice here, namely ffmpeg or libav
as implementation, and instead of one USE flag you want to introduce
two (ffmpeg_impl_ffmpeg and ffmpeg_impl_libav), but of
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
In a nutshell, you have a binary choice here, namely ffmpeg or
libav as implementation, and instead of one USE flag you want to
introduce two (ffmpeg_impl_ffmpeg and ffmpeg_impl_libav), but of
the 4 possible
Signed-off-by: Toralf Förster toralf.foers...@gmx.de
---
pym/portage/news.py | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/pym/portage/news.py b/pym/portage/news.py
index 2c45f85..ec10feb 100644
--- a/pym/portage/news.py
+++ b/pym/portage/news.py
@@ -421,5 +421,5 @@ def
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 17:14:22 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why? When you have USE=-ffmpeg, the libav flag is a don't care
which is ignored. ffmpeg controls the feature, libav chooses
the implementation. This is very clear from the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:00:24 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 16/01/15 18:30, Jan Matejka wrote:
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 10:49:13 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/11/14 06:06, Harsh Bhatt wrote:
Also make
Jan Matejka:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:00:24 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 16/01/15 18:30, Jan Matejka wrote:
On Fri, 07 Nov 2014 10:49:13 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/11/14 06:06, Harsh Bhatt wrote:
Also make might enjoy improvements.
shake?
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 18:18:14
Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 18:08:01 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 17:14:22 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why?
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 18:08:01
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 17:14:22 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why? When you have USE=-ffmpeg, the libav flag is a don't care
which is ignored. ffmpeg
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 18:08:01 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 17:14:22 +0100
Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Why? When you have USE=-ffmpeg, the libav flag is a don't care
which is ignored. ffmpeg controls
Dnia 2015-02-02, o godz. 11:00:59
Michael Orlitzky m...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On 02/02/2015 10:50 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Maybe. Though it still will keep the confusion of !libav meaning ffmpeg.
We could remove USE=libav from the tree, leaving only USE=ffmpeg. Then
ffmpeg_impl_libav
On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 19:53:14 +0100
Toralf Förster toralf.foers...@gmx.de wrote:
Signed-off-by: Toralf Förster toralf.foers...@gmx.de
---
pym/portage/news.py | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/pym/portage/news.py b/pym/portage/news.py
index 2c45f85..ec10feb
39 matches
Mail list logo
