Re: [gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)

On 28-02-2018 22:08:54 +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm working on a verification implementation of > > https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following > > scenario that I don't know if it's

Re: [gentoo-dev] python-any-r1 deps used only for testing

On 2018-02-28 23:03, Francesco Riosa wrote: > Result is that with no python:2.7 installed ebuild will fail, always > both with test enabled or disabled. Why haven't you posted this information in the bug?! > I've realized all this after bug https://bugs.gentoo.org/648940 was > closed, that

Re: [gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 04:10:52PM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working on a verification implementation of > https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following > scenario that I don't know if it's right or wrong: ... > Does anybody know or have a pointer to what

[gentoo-dev] python-any-r1 deps used only for testing

hi, sys-devel/automake would to depend on python:2.7 if and only if "test" are enabled. For the tast it inherit python-any-r1 eclass than depend conditionally with test? ( ${PYTHON_DEPS} )" Additionally the ebuild call python_setup() in src_test() However this does not work, because eclass

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc 2.16/19 for Gentoo Prefix on antique kernels

Am Mittwoch, 28. Februar 2018, 11:57:37 CET schrieb Andreas K. Huettel: > > > https://git.centos.org/summary/rpms!glibc.git > > 2.5 and 2.12 aren't there, but for 2.17 it looks good, this seems to be the > complete patchset. We should be able to translate that into a gentoo branch. ... except

[gentoo-dev] about non-ebuild files in the tree (and verification thereof)

Hi, I'm working on a verification implementation of https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0074.html and ran into the following scenario that I don't know if it's right or wrong: Consider net-misc/srf-ip-conn-srv % ls files Manifest metadata.xml srf-ip-conn-srv-.ebuild srf-ip-conn-srv.pid % cat

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc 2.16/19 for Gentoo Prefix on antique kernels

Am Mittwoch, 28. Februar 2018, 11:20:36 CET schrieb James Le Cuirot: > On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 11:10:13 +0100 > > "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > another option would be to (try to) revive glibc-2.5, 2.12, and 2.17 > > instead. > > > > You maybe won't get the full details of

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc 2.16/19 for Gentoo Prefix on antique kernels

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 11:10:13 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > another option would be to (try to) revive glibc-2.5, 2.12, and 2.17 instead. > > Yes I know they are even older, but these are the versions that RHEL uses, > and > for which RH still provides support

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc 2.16/19 for Gentoo Prefix on antique kernels

Am Sonntag, 25. Februar 2018, 07:17:47 CET schrieb Benda Xu: > Hi all, > > Yes, it's 2018. But there are still RHEL 4 and 5 systems running > antique kernels such as 2.6.8 and 2.6.18... Benda, another option would be to (try to) revive glibc-2.5, 2.12, and 2.17 instead. Yes I know they are