Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Would you join to a new project "Themes"?
Hi! Am 30.01.2021 um 00:25 schrieb Aisha Tammy: Happy to contribute!! Love messing about with ricing :D Aisha If you will would like to help, we have now Themes project to all those themes. Conrad
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Would you join to a new project "Themes"?
Hi! Am 30.01.2021 um 00:22 schrieb Jonas Stein: x11-themes/* are very similar. It could make sense to have a project who maintains all x11-themes. I never used themes so I am out, but please reply, if you would like to create/join such a project. I've spoken with Jonas on IRC and I offered my help to get all those themes in a better state. He was so kind and created a project Themes [1] and I will start with all those m-n packages, to bump them into an current state. Conrad [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Themes
[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] tree-sitter-grammar.eclass: Fix compatibility with lld
-soname is only accepted by GNU ld, but --soname= is accepted by both GNU ld and LLVM lld. Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/828093 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829668 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829669 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829670 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829671 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829672 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829673 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829674 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829675 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829676 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/829677 Signed-off-by: Matthew Smith --- eclass/tree-sitter-grammar.eclass | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/eclass/tree-sitter-grammar.eclass b/eclass/tree-sitter-grammar.eclass index 7207ecf3ddd7c..10baa3c4adb6c 100644 --- a/eclass/tree-sitter-grammar.eclass +++ b/eclass/tree-sitter-grammar.eclass @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ tree-sitter-grammar_src_compile() { ${link} ${LDFLAGS} \ -shared \ *.o \ - -Wl,-soname ${soname} \ + -Wl,--soname=${soname} \ -o "${WORKDIR}"/${soname} || die }
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category: net-servers
On 20/12/2021 09.05, Anna “CyberTailor” wrote: On 2021-12-20 01:18, Jonas Stein wrote: I think we need a more precise definition if we do not want this. "servers for miscellaneous application-level network protocols"? sounds like server-misc/* what is the benefit? https://xkcd.com/1077/ I do not think this is a good idea. Categories should be as sharp and clear as possible. -- Best, Jonas