Re: [gentoo-dev] Contributed ebuilds and copyright questions

On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 09:17:08 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Ulrich Mueller > wrote: > > > > Also, calling eclass functions could be considered linking. It is > > not entirely clear to me if e.g. a binpkg built with a CDDL licensed

Re: [gentoo-dev] Commented packages in the @system set

On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:43:44 -0400 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > Looking at profiles/base/packages, I see a bunch of lines that are > commented out. For example, > > *sys-apps/which > #*sys-devel/autoconf > #*sys-devel/automake > *sys-devel/binutils > #*sys-devel/bison >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Commented packages in the @system set

On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 07:11:48 -0700 Raymond Jennings wrote: > Don't you need autoconf and automake to build a lot of packages? A lot. Once they're built, you dont need these anymore.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Contributed ebuilds and copyright questions

On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:15:09 -0400 Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 09:17:08 -0400 > > Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > >&

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] cmake-utils.eclass: export compilers to environment instead of setting in toolchain file, bug 542530

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 00:52:17 +0100 Maciej Mrozowski wrote: > From: Maciej Mrozowski > > --- > eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 6 +++--- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] cmake-utils.eclass: export compilers to environment instead of setting in toolchain file, bug 542530

On Fri, 4 Nov 2016 12:33:37 + James Le Cuirot <ch...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:20:16 +0100 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 00:52:17 +0100 > > Maciej Mrozowski <reave...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] tinfo flag

On Wed, 7 Dec 2016 10:16:47 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > > Basically you're suggesting to drop either of those modes. Now I'm > > asking, would one of those (likely tinfo mode) be workable in all > > packages? Do you find that it would cause less issues than this > > solution?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: x11-libs/gtk+:1

On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 21:22:12 +0200 Mart Raudsepp wrote: > # Mart Raudsepp (06 Jan 2017) > # No releases of this API version since April 2001, abandoned > # in favour of gtk+:2 for 14 years. > # Masked for removal in 30 days. Bug 604862. > x11-libs/gtk+:1 > Oh

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:17:43 + Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:12:04 +0100 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > However, retroactively adding new rules > > Which, as you've already been told,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:00:12 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On czw, 2017-03-23 at 19:52 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:53:25 +0100 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On czw, 2017-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:20:59 -0400 Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 03/23/2017 04:22 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > Indeed, according to pms.git commit log, the rule was laxed because > > it was clearly an oversight in EAPI6 [1] and was the standard >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 20:30:40 + Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:22:54 +0100 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > Indeed, according to pms.git commit log, the rule was laxed because > > it was cl

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:41:39 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Am Dienstag, 21. März 2017, 11:24:39 CET schrieb Andreas K. Huettel: > > > > So what's so special about your packages that you *need* a hack as > > ugly as eblits? > > > > No response. Seems like there

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-libs/ncurses: Use --cache-file to speedup subsequent econf runs

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 19:33:46 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On wto, 2017-03-21 at 17:55 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:30:29 +0100 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On wto, 2017-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 22:45:54 +0100 David Seifert <s...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2017-03-23 at 22:42 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:20:59 -0400 > > Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:05:45 +0100 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 22:45:54 +0100 > > David Seifert <s...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > >> https://bugs.gen

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:45:41 + Ciaran McCreesh wrote: [...] > > after a few dozens of emails, what i understand of the issue is: > > autoconf assumes either the eblit stuff is in the environment, or > > FILESDIR variable is empty or points to its files dir;

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:55:42 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 23. März 2017, 10:51:01 CET schrieb Alexis Ballier: > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:41:39 +0100 > > > > "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfri...@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 18:46:35 + Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:41:01 +0100 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > The PMS[0] says > > > > > >Ebuilds must not access [FILESDIR] i

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 12:36:24 -0400 Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 03/23/2017 09:36 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > >> > >> No, the argument is about "we want to clean up the tree from > >> abusive hacks". > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:53:25 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On czw, 2017-03-23 at 10:51 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 10:41:39 +0100 > > "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > Am D

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Master plan for fixing elibtoolize

On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:14:12 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, everyone. > > Since the bug about libtool.eclass [1] has not received any > attention, I hereby declare maintainer timeout and start working on > improving the eclass. > > The main goals are to: > > a. stop

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 20:25:52 +0100 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > What makes me wonder more are the proposed solutions: So far the > > only proposals I've seen are either inlining *all

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 19:24:58 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On pon, 2017-03-20 at 18:01 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > What makes me wonder more are the proposed solutions: So far the > > only proposals I've seen are either inlining *all* the code or >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 22:19:16 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On pon, 2017-03-20 at 22:12 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 19:24:58 +0100 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On pon, 2017-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:43:37 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 03/21/2017 09:28 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: > > In general, the concept of code-sharing common blocks of logic > > between multiple ebuilds in a specific package directory that is > > not a top-level eclass is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:41:58 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand <k...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 03/21/2017 10:17 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:43:37 +0100 > > Kristian Fiskerstrand <k...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > (up to discussion ofc

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

> +toolchain-autoconf_src_prepare() { [...] > + > + autotools-autoconf_src_prepare This seems unlikely to work

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:07:33 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, Michał Górny wrote: > > > 100 insertions(+), 198 deletions(-) > > This alone is rather convincing. Indeed, but that eclass fails to follow devmanual eclass 101 [1]: An eclass is a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Master plan for fixing elibtoolize

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 07:53:31 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > > > 3. copy elibtoolize logic to Portage, and make it apply implicitly > > > on econf [do we need to apply it elsewhere?]; disable explicit > > > libtoolize when Portage supports that. > > > > Related to the above

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Master plan for fixing elibtoolize

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 11:21:58 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On sob, 2017-03-18 at 11:18 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 07:53:31 +0100 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > 3. copy elibt

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:49:40 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > obvious NAK until you sort out the open questions already raised > > about the backwards breaking change you're trying to land in PMS. > > There are indeed

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:40:51 -0400 Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > I just tried and with portage 2.3.5, FILESDIR is unset/empty in > > global scope here. At least an 'ewa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 15:12:43 +0100 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > >> After the PMS change, we will have the same properties for DISTDIR, > >> FILESDIR, WORKDIR, and S. Namely: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:57:44 +0100 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > Indeed, but that eclass fails to follow devmanual eclass 101 [1]: > > An eclass is a collection of code which

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 19:58:55 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On czw, 2017-03-16 at 19:42 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:57:44 +0100 > > Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Master plan for fixing elibtoolize

On Sat, 18 Mar 2017 19:29:36 + Peter Stuge <pe...@stuge.se> wrote: > Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > If elibtoolize results in different binaries being produced, then > > > it's done wrong in the first place. AFAIU the primary goal of > > > elibtoolize logi

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Pre-GLEP: Security Project

On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 19:55:44 -0400 Yury German <bluekni...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2017, at 4:14 AM, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > Also, it'd be nice to have something more formal for sec. cleanup: > > "

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-devel/autoconf: Convert from eblits into an eclass, #586424

On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 21:14:58 +0100 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > What do you consider demand ? > > > A handful of packages that have to write a hundred lines of > > boile

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] gnome2-utils.eclass: gnome2_query_immodules*, use EROOT, #611030

On Sat, 22 Apr 2017 13:43:21 -0400 Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 4:20 AM, Michał Górny > wrote: > > Respect EROOT when running gtk-query-immodules-* tools, alike other > > updaters in the eclass. This ensures that x11-libs/gtk+ installs > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual -- virtual/go to fix go build time dependencies

On Thu, 9 Mar 2017 11:06:54 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > 2. Work with the PMS team to come up with a solution for the > problem. I think dependency labels & parts fill nicely that void. I have not done proper research about it but I have yet to see a serious proposal for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Fwd: [Bug 597822] www-apache/mod_perl-2.0.10 dev-perl/Chatbot-Eliza-1.60.0 keyword request

On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:45:07 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > This keywording bug 597822 is now open since > 2016-10-22. Man, it's been only 5 months :)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Fwd: [Bug 597822] www-apache/mod_perl-2.0.10 dev-perl/Chatbot-Eliza-1.60.0 keyword request

On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 22:25:45 + (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Alexis Ballier posted on Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:59:56 +0100 as excerpted: > > > On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:45:07 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" > > <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Pre-GLEP: Security Project

On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 21:50:51 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > A draft of a Pre-GLEP for the Security project is available for > reading at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:K_f/GLEP:Security > > The GLEP follows a line of GLEPs for special projects that have > tree-wide

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] eutils.eclass: prune_libtool_files, make .pc subst errors fatal

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 12:00:08 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > Make the substitution errors in prune_libtool_files logic fatal to > avoid the dependency of eqawarn. They're extremely unlikely to happen > anyway. --- > eclass/eutils.eclass | 7 --- > 1 file changed, 4

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] eutils.eclass: prune_libtool_files, make .pc subst errors fatal

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 13:20:18 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > > If you go that way then it would be best if this function had a > > 'has "virtual/pkgconfig" ${DEPEND} || die ...' kind of logic > > You can't reliably query DEPEND in an ebuild. yeah i though so > > the message

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Pre-GLEP: Security Project

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 09:14:09 +0100 Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > My point here is to avoid having all the responsibility falling under > the lead In other words: If you want to avoid having bugs inactive for too long, don't introduce a bus factor of 1 through the project lead :)

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Pre-GLEP: Security Project

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:59:11 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand <k...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 03/12/2017 09:14 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > Most of it seems more appropriate for a project page to me and up to > > the sec. team, so I'll comment on the global parts only. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual -- virtual/go to fix go build time dependencies

On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 13:06:45 -0800 Zac Medico wrote: > On 03/02/2017 11:24 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On 03/02/2017 02:05 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > >>> > >>> This is why we can't have nice things. > >> > >> For those that are interested, I'm planning to to make

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual -- virtual/go to fix go build time dependencies

On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 16:46:22 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 03/02/2017 04:30 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > The point is to specify dependencies declaratively. A dependency > > expresses a dependency, not an action. If you can't express the > > kind of dependency you

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual -- virtual/go to fix go build time dependencies

On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 17:36:16 -0500 Michael Orlitzky <m...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 03/02/2017 04:53 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > >> > >> Back on topic: > >> > >> What kind of dependency do we need, anyway? William, are you saying > >> that if I

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual -- virtual/go to fix go build time dependencies

On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 14:56:37 + Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 09:47:35 -0500 > Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On 03/02/2017 09:24 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > >> > > >> In other words, the ":=" only does something special in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-libs/ncurses: Use --cache-file to speedup subsequent econf runs

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:46:43 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > Use --cache-file to reuse the previous check results in the subsequent > configure script runs. This gives a major speed advantage (beating the > previous parallel runs) and significant CPU savings. Just in case (didn't

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] sys-libs/ncurses: Use --cache-file to speedup subsequent econf runs

On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:30:29 +0100 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On wto, 2017-03-21 at 17:05 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 16:46:43 +0100 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > Use --cach

Re: [gentoo-dev] New eclass: opam.eclass

On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 16:18:10 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On pon, 2017-07-24 at 17:20 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > # Copyright 1999-2017 Gentoo Foundation > > # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] New eclass: opam.eclass

> > > > > "${pkg}.install" || die > > > done > > > } > > > > > > opam_src_install() { > > > opam-install "${PN}" > > > # Handle opam putting doc in a subdir > > > if [ -d "${ED}/usr/share/doc/${PF}/${PN}" ] ; then > > > > Is PN always the correct subdirectory

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sun, 09 Jul 2017 13:36:16 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On nie, 2017-07-09 at 11:29 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > You don't seem to get how normalizing and constant > > propagation/elimination works. > > > > Basically, reordering would

Re: [gentoo-dev] About adding a *warning* to remind maintainers to check for new PYTHON_COMPAT values

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 11:55:30 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 01:04:10PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Hello > > > > Looking to the list of packages still not supporting python 3.5: > > https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gpyutils/34-to-35.txt > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] taking a break from arches stabilization

On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 19:22:20 +0200 Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > Hi all. > > every time that I attach my tmux session to see what happens on irc, > I always see the same discussion about the 'minor' arches status. > Since I joined gentoo(2011) I worked on all arches except hppa, I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, everyone. > > I think the affairs have settled enough and I've finished filling > in the pre-GLEP for REQUIRED_USE auto-enforcing. It's got all > the algorithms, rationale and separated reference implementation. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:01:39 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:49:56 +0200 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0200 > > Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 15:23:39 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:14:09 +0200 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 13:01:39 +0100 > > Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com&g

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 21:05:57 +0200 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 16:39:29 +0200 > > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> Indeed, m

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 20:44:24 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On sob, 2017-07-08 at 16:12 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:43:39 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi, everyone. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 12:26:59 +0200 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > | * An any-of group (||) evaluates to true if at least one of the > | items in it evaluates to true. > | * An exactly-one-of group (^^) evaluates to true if exactly one of > | the items in it evaluates to true, and all

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-GLEP RFC: Automated enforcing of REQUIRED_USE constraints

On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 23:56:07 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On sob, 2017-07-08 at 22:34 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Sat, 08 Jul 2017 20:44:24 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On sob, 2017-

Re: [gentoo-dev] New eclass: opam.eclass

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 18:11:39 -0400 "Aaron W. Swenson" <titanof...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 2017-07-24 17:20, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > Hey, > > > > Here is an eclass that would allow me to factor quite a bit of > > redundant code. > > >

[gentoo-dev] New eclass: opam.eclass

${PN}.install || die -} Alexis.# Copyright 1999-2017 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 # @ECLASS: opam.eclass # @MAINTAINER: # Gentoo ML Project <m...@gentoo.org> # @AUTHOR: # Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> # @BLURB: Provides

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Providing consistent means to enable tests requiring Internet access

On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:14:13 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > b. those tests can easily be enabled, and that fact is recorded > in the installed package metadata, > > c. the flag can easily be used in RESTRICT="" constraint to easily > disable all the tests. I see that as a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Providing consistent means to enable tests requiring Internet access

On Fri, 28 Apr 2017 07:07:26 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Dnia 27 kwietnia 2017 23:42:34 CEST, Alexis Ballier > <aball...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): > >On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:14:13 +0200 > >Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Providing consistent means to enable tests requiring Internet access

On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 17:57:30 -0400 Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 5:42 PM, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> > wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Apr 2017 16:14:13 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] crossdev: installing _host_ build dependencies not automatic?

On Wed, 3 May 2017 12:05:48 +0200 "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > I encountered while > working on some cross-compiling project. > > Admittedly, it may not be that easy to handle host package > dependencies fully

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: New profiles for default-pie transition

On Wed, 10 May 2017 15:42:25 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 05/10/2017 03:29 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 10. Mai 2017, 13:58:56 CEST schrieb Dirkjan Ochtman: > >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand > >> > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp"

On Tue, 09 May 2017 12:26:48 -0500 Matthias Maier wrote: > Title: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp" > Author: Matthias Maier > Content-Type: text/plain > Posted: 2017-05-07 > Revision: 1 > News-Item-Format: 1.0 > Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-6.3.0 >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp"

On Tue, 9 May 2017 23:18:20 +0200 Hanno Böck wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 09 May 2017 15:55:36 -0500 > Matthias Maier wrote: > > > Well, Alexis certainly makes a strong point. Breaking installed > > static archives by changing a use flag shouldn't be as easy

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp"

On Wed, 10 May 2017 01:40:36 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfri...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 10. Mai 2017, 00:47:30 CEST schrieb Alexis Ballier: > > On Tue, 9 May 2017 23:18:20 +0200 Hanno Böck <ha...@gentoo.org> > > wrote: > > > I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp"

On Wed, 10 May 2017 01:44:06 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > > > While I believe it might be a bit too early to default-enable pie, > > why not, but the news item *must* contain instructions that people > > should 'emerge -e world' in order for it to work. > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp"

On Tue, 09 May 2017 18:13:06 -0500 Matthias Maier wrote: > > For a transition we can probably build everything with -fPIE but not > > link with -pie. If we want that to happen fast, gcc-6 might do that > > and gcc-7 add the -pie option. > > I am not entirely convinced that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp", v2

On Tue, 09 May 2017 18:58:42 -0500 Matthias Maier wrote: > This is a reworded news item (assuming we proceed with the plan to > default-enable USE=pie). Suggestions for improving the emerge command > to fix static archives is highly welcomed. > Really, I think the slot to

Re: [gentoo-dev] New 17.0 release profiles

On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:05:20 +0100 Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > - dev-lang/ocaml will need to be defaulted to pie. ml@ ocaml generates its own asm code and uses gcc to link historically this caused issues on hardened since gcc had pie in its specs but the .o files it was

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:53:00 +0200 Pacho Ramos wrote: > This packages are now up for grabs: > dev-ml/fort added ml@g.o there as a matter of fact: dev-ml/* should have ml@g.o at least as fallback to have easier coordination & transitions for major ocaml releases

Re: [gentoo-dev] The status of grsecurity upstream and hardened-sources downstream

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 12:28:27 -0400 "Anthony G. Basile" wrote: > Hardened Gentoo has two sides to it, kernel hardening (done via > hardened-sources) and toolchain/executable hardening. The two are > interrelated but independent enough that toolchain hardening can > continue

Re: [gentoo-dev] toolchain meeting agenda for today 19:00 UTC #gentoo-toolchain

On Sat, 20 May 2017 19:38:01 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > - Globally setting -std=c++14 in upcoming 17.0 profiles A bit late to the party, but what was the outcome of the meeting, esp. this part ? I'm not sure if default CXXFLAGS would make such a difference since

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Mon, 29 May 2017 17:33:13 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > Hello, > > For a long time we seem to be missing appropriate tools to handle USE > flag constraints efficiently. EAPI 4 brought REQUIRED_USE but all > things considered, it has proven to be far from an optimal solution.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Tue, 30 May 2017 09:22:45 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 30 May 2017 09:42:45 +0200 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > Oh crap, this requires to solve SAT. > > The main problem would not be solving

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Tue, 30 May 2017 10:29:48 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > That's why I'm sending this to the mailing list as a RFC, not a > proposal to vote on. It solves a defined set of problems, and gives > other chance to improve it and turn it into a complete solution. It's > not like it's

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Mon, 29 May 2017 23:23:55 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On pon, 2017-05-29 at 20:00 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Mon, 29 May 2017 17:33:13 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: [...] > > > It can also be used with

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Tue, 30 May 2017 00:01:16 +0200 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Mon, 29 May 2017, Michał Górny wrote: > Also, can we find a better name? Sorry for the bikeshedding at this > early stage, but I believe that ENFORCED_USE can be easily confused > with use.force in profiles.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Tue, 30 May 2017 10:05:41 +0200 Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 30 May 2017, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 May 2017 00:01:16 +0200 > > Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > >> Al

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Tue, 30 May 2017 09:56:07 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 30 May 2017 10:46:54 +0200 > Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 30 May 2017 09:22:45 +0100 > > Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.c

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:54:56 +0200 Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:51:33 +0100 > Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:35:04 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wro

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On wto, 2017-05-30 at 20:46 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Tue, 30 May 2017 20:11:38 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > [...] > > > > > Of cours

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:51:33 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 09:35:04 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 08:24 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > > > Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:24:20 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > For example: > > > > foo? ( bar ) > > > > would mean 'if you have USE=foo, then USE=bar is enabled as well'. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 10:03:12 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 09:32 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 08:55:17 +0200 > > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > On wto, 2017-

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:33:32 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: [...] > The problem is: how far is that going to work? That's what I would > like to try determining in the first place. > > I'm most worried about complex constructs like: > > foo? ( bar ) ^^ ( baz bar ) The order in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 31 May 2017 15:04:52 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On śro, 2017-05-31 at 10:38 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > What if I specifically set USE=-bar in make.conf ? Do we really > > > > want PM to override that without telling me ?

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 23:31:25 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: [...] > > There are probably dozens of ways to make that non deterministic. > > Here's one: USE='-*'. Apply '|| ( cli cgi fpm apache2 embed phpdbg > > )' last; this enables 'cli'. Since it's the last one, REQUIRED_USE > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 08:37:30 +0200 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On czw, 2017-06-01 at 23:31 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > On czw, 2017-06-01 at 10:55 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 May 2017 21:02:24 +0200 > > > Micha

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 23:31:25 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > My current code is on github [1]. It's ugly, slow and incomplete. It's > merely a proof-of-concept and testing toy but still could give some > clues. > > [1]:https://github.com/mgorny/required-use Nice work by the way.

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >