Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-plugins/gnash
Michał Górny schrieb: I think it is a valid concern that removal of packages may sometimes be overzealous, and to better keep packages in the tree as long as they are useful and workarounds exist for build/runtime problems. Just in case of gnash there is really no benefit in keeping it. It may make sense if there is some developer caring enough to actually put those workarounds in the ebuild, rather than expecting every single user trying to build it find them himself (and hope he's got all of them, and the right set). If you mean, putting these workarounds as elog message, maybe. But putting them as code is not always possible, as it may require changes in other packages or similar. And sometimes, there were building and working packages masked for removal just because they lacked a maintainer. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New global USE flag: gtk-doc
Ühel kenal päeval, R, 24.08.2018 kell 23:06, kirjutas Mart Raudsepp: > Longer version idea: > Build and install gtk-doc based developer documentation for dev- > util/devhelp, IDE and offline use This has been pushed now with initial consumers (fresh meson based packages or converts from autotools). I have a candidate list of packages that could use a IUSE flag usage change accordingly. It's a short list because I didn't consider autotools packages, as for them it often means to rebuild it for questionable benefits, thus I don't actually want those cases to add unnecessary rebuild time cost with a global USE=gtk-doc - they are already there without current USE=doc and accessible in devhelp and some IDEs. This means autotools builds that don't use a properly disted tarball won't get a bug filed from me right now (but why are they using a bad tarball?). I'll try to get those from my candidate list checked through and converted to bug reports soon for applicable ones. If more than lets say 3, then probably a tracker bug too. Mart signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-plugins/gnash
On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 20:36 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: > Michał Górny schrieb: > > > So maybe mask it, but not remove? > > > > > > > Maybe it's time you realize that if you want something to stay, then you > > need to actually *take it* and *fix it*. Keeping clearly broken stuff > > so that every user could try jumping through a few hoops to build it has > > no value. > > I think it is a valid concern that removal of packages may sometimes be > overzealous, and to better keep packages in the tree as long as they are > useful and workarounds exist for build/runtime problems. Just in case of > gnash there is really no benefit in keeping it. > It may make sense if there is some developer caring enough to actually put those workarounds in the ebuild, rather than expecting every single user trying to build it find them himself (and hope he's got all of them, and the right set). -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-plugins/gnash
Michał Górny schrieb: So maybe mask it, but not remove? Maybe it's time you realize that if you want something to stay, then you need to actually *take it* and *fix it*. Keeping clearly broken stuff so that every user could try jumping through a few hoops to build it has no value. I think it is a valid concern that removal of packages may sometimes be overzealous, and to better keep packages in the tree as long as they are useful and workarounds exist for build/runtime problems. Just in case of gnash there is really no benefit in keeping it. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-plugins/gnash
On Wed, 2018-08-29 at 12:01 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 03:20:31 +0200 Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn > wrote: > > # Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn (29 Aug 2015) > > # Masked for removal in 30 days. Multiple build failures. Upstream inactive. > > # (bugs #321017, #581284, #588692, #602786, #649006, #654140) > > www-plugins/gnash > > > Is there any replacement available? AFAIK no, at least among free > software. And there still many sites which require flash to work. > > So maybe mask it, but not remove? > Maybe it's time you realize that if you want something to stay, then you need to actually *take it* and *fix it*. Keeping clearly broken stuff so that every user could try jumping through a few hoops to build it has no value. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-plugins/gnash
Andrew Savchenko schrieb: # Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn (29 Aug 2015) # Masked for removal in 30 days. Multiple build failures. Upstream inactive. # (bugs #321017, #581284, #588692, #602786, #649006, #654140) www-plugins/gnash Is there any replacement available? AFAIK no, at least among free software. And there still many sites which require flash to work. The following other free flash implementations exist: * LightSpark: active development, ASv2 only * swfdec: development stopped in 2009 * Shumway: abandoned by Mozilla in 2016, very low development activity still happens in github[0] I think your best bet to replace gnash would be Shumway. Though it is not possible to use on current Firefox[1]. So maybe mask it, but not remove? Current gnash snapshot in the tree can only build against a specific set of dependencies, which may disappear any time now (newer versions are stable). I tried to build upstream git head, but it fails. This was reported a year ago, no reaction from upstream: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?51484 If it is impossible to build, then I think having it in the tree has no value. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn [0] https://github.com/ExE-Boss/mozilla-shumway [1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1443253
[gentoo-dev] Last rites: sys-boot/winusb
# Mikle Kolyada (30 Aug 2018) # Dead upstream, does not work properly. # Unmaintained. # Use sys-boot/woeusb instead. sys-boot/winusb signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
