Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking =dev-libs/openssl-1.1*
On 06.11.2018 12:53, Craig Andrews wrote: =dev-libs/openssl-1.1* has been masked since 26 Aug 2016 - that's over 2 years ago. I think it's time to talk about dropping the mask. The tracker issue https://bugs.gentoo.org/592438 currently has 12 open issues. Some will be closed by tree cleaning. package.mask also shows a number of packages being masked because their latest versions require >=dev-libs/openssl-1.1 What's the plan for removing this mask? Thanks, ~Craig I think we should make a plan for removing this mask. I'm not saying we do it today or tomorrow - but we should do it someday. Should we set a date for removing the mask? Should the tracker have 0 issues blocking it? Something else? Thanks, ~Craig signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09
(Moving to gentoo-dev) On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Michał Górny wrote: I think that if there's one package that doesn't work with profiles (compared to the very large number of packages which just work fine), it's not the profiles but the package being broken (read: doing silly assumptions). Therefore, it's not 17.0 profiles being the problem but the package in question. Claiming that people doing any change to Gentoo are required to fix all the problematic packages is just silly. This is basically saying that it's fine to add bad quality packages and then demand others to fix them for you. People who worked on the profile can fix bugs in the profile. Don't expect them to pursue whatever broken packages you like just because they happened to change the fragile conditions under which they worked. See bug #672454. clozurecl compiles and works fine with the upstream-provided compilation flags. So, we cannot ask the upstream to solve our problems for us. clozurecl compiles and works fine (for me this means that it can compile maxima and fricas, and they work) in the 13.0 profile. In the 17.0 one, its compilation loops forever on ~x86; on ~amd64 it compiles, but does not work properly (cannot compile maxima, bug #665364). So, the reason is in the new compilation or linking flags introduced in 17.0. Is it possible to compile one specific package with compilation/linking flags closely following the 13.0 ones? How? That said, if you insist I'll fix this package. But I'm pretty sure you won't like my fix. If after this fix it will be able to compile maxima and fricas, and they will work, that would be sufficient for me. Andrey
Re: [gentoo-dev] dev-lisp/clozurtecl and the 17.0 profile, was: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-12-09
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:02 +0700, gro...@gentoo.org wrote: > (Moving to gentoo-dev) > > On Sun, 2 Dec 2018, Michał Górny wrote: > > I think that if there's one package that doesn't work with profiles > > (compared to the very large number of packages which just work fine), > > it's not the profiles but the package being broken (read: doing silly > > assumptions). Therefore, it's not 17.0 profiles being the problem but > > the package in question. > > > > Claiming that people doing any change to Gentoo are required to fix all > > the problematic packages is just silly. This is basically saying that > > it's fine to add bad quality packages and then demand others to fix them > > for you. People who worked on the profile can fix bugs in the profile. > > Don't expect them to pursue whatever broken packages you like just > > because they happened to change the fragile conditions under which they > > worked. > > See bug #672454. > > clozurecl compiles and works fine with the upstream-provided compilation > flags. So, we cannot ask the upstream to solve our problems for us. > > clozurecl compiles and works fine (for me this means that it can compile > maxima and fricas, and they work) in the 13.0 profile. In the 17.0 one, > its compilation loops forever on ~x86; on ~amd64 it compiles, but does not > work properly (cannot compile maxima, bug #665364). So, the reason is in > the new compilation or linking flags introduced in 17.0. > > Is it possible to compile one specific package with compilation/linking > flags closely following the 13.0 ones? How? -fno-PIE, -fno-PIC are two potentially useful options. Possibly more. Once you figure out which of them is necessary, you should tell upstream to append it instead of relying on unsafe compiler defaults. > > > That said, if you insist I'll fix this package. But I'm pretty sure you > > won't like my fix. > > If after this fix it will be able to compile maxima and fricas, and they > will work, that would be sufficient for me. > No. After this fix it will be gone, and people will be able to compile maxima and fricas using a working clisp compiler. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Last rites: sci-mathematics/reduce
# Andrey Grozin (03 Dec 2018) # Masked since 2016. # Removal in 30 days. Bug #671242. =sci-mathematics/reduce-20110414-r1
Re: [gentoo-dev] up for grabs: www-misc/zoneminder
On Sun, 02 Dec 2018 23:47:48 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > www-misc/zoneminder is up for grabs since I dont use it anymore and > have no time for maintaining it... > I will take it. -- С уважением,| Best regards, Виктор Кустов | Victor Kustov XMPP: ktr...@jabber.ru I use FREE operation system: 4.14.67-calculate GNU/Linux up 9 weeks, 3 days, 4 hours, 19 minutes pgpZBcdg1GlFR.pgp Description: Цифровая подпись OpenPGP
