much
expected (PHP is one of them; and while the failure isn't fatal there,
it still takes tons of time to go thru those ~2000 tests). And there are
tons of packages where tests are more or less unmaintained.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http
Matthew Marlowe wrote:
3) Free license and apparently even some free support and infrastructure
management for open-source projects. Apparently, they donated one of the bug
db's that the apache software foundation is using, for instance.
Free as in - BitKeeper? :P Nah, no need to repeat
://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128588
[2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103664
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA
, having a critical facility broken for ~6 months right now =!
patience. It plain sucks.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA
Ned Ludd wrote:
On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 16:07 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
Because it's been broken for ages? Because I've asked the same on the
bug I've referred to multiple times, as did quite a few other people,
and the thing is still dead ~3 hours a day? (So uhm, the argument that
infra doesn't
. That's
including setting up the software, and testing it to make sure that the
issues that's been occurring have been addressed.
Wonderful.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key
a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your
| tirade).
No no. Stephen's post was beautifully ironic satire.
ZOMG! This this to gentoo-blurb or whatever else, this thread is long
enough as it is even without this off-topic junk.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
).
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
Those were nominated but did not (yet) confirm their participation :
jakub
Wh, someone nominated me? Thanks, I accept. ;)
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7
Stuart Herbert wrote:
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
An advantage to this approach is that package moves just become aliases
- existing stuff doesn't break yet you get the new categorisation as
well.
That's actually a disadvantage. The whole point of moving a package is
to take it *out* of its
to run an etc-update and
pray that it was not a file he/she had in masking.
Err, no? You don't need to run etc-update/dispatch-conf to get those
updated on package moves.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch
-misc/mc that just tend to break stuff.
Any volunteers? Thanks!
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95247
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B
? ;)
Thanks.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
Michael Cummings wrote:
I'm happy to announce a new addition to the perl team
Welcome! Perl, huh? :P
http://fastar.detonate.net/ftp/images/matrixse/18/6.jpg
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ser Gio wrote:
Hello,
Why does x11-libs/gtk+-2.8.19 has the X useflag? The ebuild doesn't
look like it's using it.
thanks,
Sérgio
Because virtualx.eclass has it in IUSE and the ebuild inherits it.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http
Ser Gio wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 00:19:44 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ser Gio wrote:
Hello,
Why does x11-libs/gtk+-2.8.19 has the X useflag? The ebuild
doesn't look like it's using it.
thanks,
Sérgio
Because virtualx.eclass has
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136953
The arch stuff (x86, amd64...) - well I don't really think they should
be in IUSE. Here's a log for the rest, without the arch flags:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~jakub/reports/20061712/unstated_flags.log
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
that dies after a couple of hours compile just because
upstream decided to rename Changelog.txt to ChangeLog.txt and noone
noticed during version bump, or because someone made a typo there. Fail
to see any benefit from this... :S Ditto for manpages.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 04:36:55AM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten?? wrote:
On Monday 10 July 2006 02:25, Luca Barbato wrote:
c is simpler. I like it.
Yes, of course if _all wranglers_ respected metadata, instead of stopping to
herd tag and assigning to that even when
Richard Fish wrote:
That won't be necessary. Things mostly works, and when they don't,
users file a bug like the aforementioned one, which should result in
that particular ebuild getting fixed, instead of the bug being marked
INVALID.
The thing is, this particular ebuild isn't actually
++.so.5
echo
einfo For more information on the steps to take when upgrading
einfo from gcc-3.3 please refer to:
einfo http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml;
echo
/snip
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op
. That versions (or later) is
*stable* everywhere where xine-lib is stable.
Try reading the bug - users are basically being shoved off with an
arrogant silence and a stamp on their forehead saying INVALID.
Nothing personal against Jakub Moc who probably has a lot to do, but
the handling of relevant
is this a good idea to break two pretty critical
packages for users that have no clue what USE=vanilla does w/ gcc.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95
Curtis Napier wrote:
Lance Albertson wrote:
Please thank GNI for helping us out! They really deserve a lot for
helping us :).
Thanks-
[1] http://www.gni.com/
Thank you GNI!
droolmmm blade cluster/drool
Yay, *plop* !!! (And no, tsunam - no compiling there :P)
--
of physically performing source distribution , a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
here). Devrel's current policy clearly is
that bugzilla may only be used for official overlays hosted on
overlays.gentoo.org,
Sorry for the inconvenience, not my fault.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch
,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
on it. And, as
there's not much left, they take something really childish and
ridiculous, such as bugzilla keywords and status whiteboard, and run to
devrel to ask for an urgent decision? What's this, if not a personal thing?
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 15:50 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
Perhaps it is a few developers trying to actually enforce the council's
decision and make sure that the 100% unofficial project doesn't *look*
official. Using InOverlay as if Sunrise is some sort of Gentoo
official
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd,
with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the
maintainers of all packages in the herd.
this would be useful regardless
While talking about herds etc...
Please, stick your addy into the relevant eclass if you are actually a
maintainer or at least a person to contact about the given eclass.
Examples of eclasses that just let me clueless and digging in the logs
when a bug/problem arrives:
cvs.eclass - ???
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
I don't know if this is a really unpopular viewpoint, but for a lot of stuff
I
maintain I put myself as maintainer and the herd I am acting as part of in
herd. My intention there is to say primarily I am taking care of this and
have taken responsibility but if I
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
- same name as herd requirement doesn't work for stuff like
cron/mysql/postgresql/apache... i.e., system accounts.
Herd aliases could be named herd-name, perhaps.
Current practice for these aliases is herd-bugs in most of the cases.
Examples - apache-bugs, php-bugs,
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
*sigh*
Indeed...
No. You've gone and changed the practices we have in place now to make
it more complicated.
No, I didn't. If games herd wants any game dumped onto games herd, then
do it. Most other people probably don't want unknown stuff dumped on them.
Say it
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 17:43 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
Say it with me.
Herd == packages
Team == people
There's no such thing like team in metadata.xml, that's what we've
been talking about for ~1 day now.
Maybe it's what you erroneously have been trying to say
used for assigning
bugs, you are using it as a placeholder for something else. Category
already tells us that it's a game, don't stick games into herd unless
you actually maintain it. Thanks.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:01:04 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This new terminology plain sucks. If you are sticking games into
herd in metadata.xml, you are just confusing me and other people
who are assigning bugs.
It's not new. If it confuses you
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:21:42 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure... so, perhaps you have some suggestion how I can read assign
bugs otherwise than using the metadata.xml; perhaps I could learn to
read minds of the developers who dump irrelevant stuff
screen resolution suck, you can
expect another funding request from blubb any time soon, it seems. :P
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717
files
on the filesystem.
Daniel
Already been there and got removed, because it broke emerge -e world for
ebuilds that need configured kernel to compile.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote:
Olivier Crete wrote:
Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a
last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask
the packages that no one cares enough about to port them.
Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK
, move it to this.is.unsupported.and.will.blow.your.box.gentoo.org if
you feel it will help anybody. I feel it's completely irrelevant, but
that's just me.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary
the effectivity by a huge margin. Also comes w/ a
nice side-effect of not bugspamming another 200 folks CCed on the bug
when someone screws w/ attachments for a couple of times.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op
://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122500
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
work to SVN if bugzilla is *the* place for all
this? Apparently it's not all that great, otherwise you wouldn't have
done that.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C
@4u wrote:
After posting and closing the bug report:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135870
Jakub Moc noticed that the current =virtual/x11-7.0 ebuild misses its
task and creates trouble.
Indeed. To re-iterate here, I'll basically re-paste what I've said on
the bug, so that people
ported, you can miss dependencies there if you have
already them emerged b/c of the virtual.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD
Olivier Crete wrote:
Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a
last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask
the packages that no one cares enough about to port them.
Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK... There's a tracker bug
Matteo Azzali wrote:
Repoman considers lots of local variables as an error, I was pointed
to expanded vars as a solution.
If no developers has something against I'll be happy to use 28 local
flags
mattepiu
Well uh, no please Don't create 28 local use flags for one ebuild,
Simon Stelling wrote:
You forgot to mention which package uses the variable.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Need a use-expanded TV_GRAB variable for xmltv
;)
--
jakub
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
really close useless cruft when you come across it (see above).
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still
/kazehakase):
Use firefox's Gecko engine.
See http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96473 as well.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD
be best resolution, there's tons of
bugs w/ ebuilds submitted that can't find a maintainer. If you want
something in portage, do you homework at least and attempt an ebuild.
Just my $0.02...
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks
spectacles? Ah, we
just didn't have a pointless flamewar for a long time, right... :S
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA
Please, finally kill this thing from CONFIG_PROTECT in
base/make.defaults, we are not Debian... :P
Thanks.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95
for error messages, until then
this is a no go... ;)
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
with many other non-KDE ebuilds
that it depends on. So please, stop wasting limited time of limited
number of Gentoo KDE maintainers by beating a dead horse.
TIA.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
and
don't waste our time with completely invalid arguments.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature
point - there's also that hotplug_$iface=no thing in
/etc/conf.d/net - wouldn't it be better to all keep network-related
settings in one place? I.e., adding coldplug_$iface=yes|no there
instead, and use RC_{HOTPLUG,COLDPLUG} in /etc/conf.d/rc for other
services only?
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
Roy Marples wrote:
Anyway, what we really need is ability to turn off that coldplug thing
*completely* on *udev* level and restore some sanity. I really don't
need to have my TV card coldplugged at the point when /dev is being
populated by devices (e.g., Bug 130766 or Bug 128962).
Not
Roy Marples wrote:
iptables already has before net, doesn't exactly help. Well, I don't
need net on boot level first of all and I didn't set it to be launched
at that runlevel. The runlevel setting gets ignored, however.
Hmmm, maybe you don't understand then :)
If coldplug adds net services
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
=st
More fun:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109386
http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/flameeyes/2005/11/16/happy_the_visibility_stuff_goes_away
http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/flameeyes/2005/10/06/ehi_i_m_invisible
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature
Carsten Lohrke wrote:
On Saturday 08 April 2006 00:52, Mike Frysinger wrote:
highly suspect statements
these states are all quite common ... trying to make some kind of
supposition as to which is the most common is a waste of time
No. It's my opinion. Respect it, please. You don't have to
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Christopher O'Neill wrote:
. I notice certain other popular distros are now running GCC4 (and
have been for some time), yet we are still running 3.4.6 (on ~x86). I
know it's a lot of work ensuring that all packages compile properly
with GCC4 and that there are no
This is just a friendly reminder that Bug 116346 doesn't seem to be
moving much. :P The two months old list seems still almost fully valid.
http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=79178action=view
Do we manage to kill the flag? Always good to have one redundant flag
less... ;)
Thanks.
--
This is a (not-so happy) reminder that the agony of gtk2 use flag will
have been lasting for half a year soon. It *really* needs to die.
For affected ebuilds, please see the attached list and Bug 106560.
Thanks.
--
jakub
app-crypt/pinentry-0.7.2
app-editors/mp-3.3.12
app-editors/mp-3.3.14
Mike Frysinger wrote:
and if there are no bugs filed ? this sort of stance is like the
lets remove
packages from portage because upstream is dead ... it benefits no one
No bugs filed? Well, just search the archives of this ML, and search
bugzilla for all those bugs about portage pulling in
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Sunday 02 April 2006 15:34, Jakub Moc wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
and if there are no bugs filed ? this sort of stance is like the
lets remove packages from portage because upstream is dead ... it
benefits no one
No bugs filed? Well, just search the archives
Carsten Lohrke wrote:
I don't see the necessity for devs and users would have to look at the
package.mask file regularly to get the information that a package is masked.
If Portage would be that smart to spit out the relevant information on
emerge --sync, a longer period would probably make
Sven Köhler wrote:
I don't when the init.d-script disappeared from the ebuilds, but well: i
still used it and didn't know about the baselayout-support for pppoe.
May I suggest reading the fine handbook?
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=4chap=3#doc_chap4
--
jakub
which might seem right but allas nothing can find
the icons in there and .desktop files are in /usr/share/applications anyway.
There are issues w/ mime-types etc. as well, but this mail is getting
long as it is, so leaving that for another one, perhaps.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:57:07 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Sounds like a perfect way to break lots and lots of systems. Those
| policies are mostly there for good reason.
|
| You want to apply policies on overlays? Well no - sorry, overlays are
| none
... :/
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 10:16:15 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| We get innundated with tons of bogus bug reports every day, overlays
| or not - see the number of invalid/duplicate bugs flowing every days.
| We got a couple of bugs in last two a three days
in trac bug trackers seemed as a good idea to
me originally, most users are simply unable to do that anyway. We tried
w/ php overlay, didn't work much.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key
, not
official tree. If user installs ebuilds from overlay and breaks his
system, then well - not a Gentoo problem. Why should any policies apply?
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature:
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key
Duncan Coutts wrote:
The way the Haskell team manages this is that we don't tell our end
users about our testing overlay. So we don't get bug reports from them.
We have three outside contributers with write access to the overlay
repo. They make changes in consultation with the team. So we're
/hb-guide-ebuild.xml?root=gentoor1=1.31r2=1.32
What's the above again? QA policy? How does user benefit from flipping a
coin wrt choosing a functionality? Sigh... :/
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch
3.3.2006, 22:19:33, Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 21:47:22 +0100
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please, until something is clarified/some consent reached, avoid
changing the docs w/ funny stuff like just flip a coin...
http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs
3.3.2006, 22:51:39, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Friday 03 March 2006 15:47, Jakub Moc wrote:
Please, until something is clarified/some consent reached, avoid changing
the docs w/ funny stuff like just flip a coin...
please, get a sense of humor, kthxbye
-mike
Sorry, I don't find anything
3.3.2006, 22:54:25, Grant Goodyear wrote:
http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/handbook/hb-guide-ebuild.xml?root=gentoor1=1.31r2=1.32
What's the above again? QA policy? How does user benefit from flipping a
coin wrt choosing a functionality? Sigh... :/
It
3.3.2006, 23:25:13, Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 22:27:45 +0100
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What kind of point does it get across, exactly?
That you must choose one flag, or set of flags, to take precedence in such
situations, but that how you choose is quite
3.3.2006, 23:32:36, Grant Goodyear wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote:
Erm, how exactly will you find out that you need to recompile that package
after such extensive build? You'll spend a couple of hours debugging when
your server app stops working? Yay! :P
I had assumed that in such a case
1.3.2006, 11:29:47, Danny van Dyk wrote:
| Where is a coding style problem related to quality of code in general
| and assurance in particular? It's more relevant than you might
think. Screwing up layout like that breaks various QA checking tools
that assume that things are in the
1.3.2006, 13:09:55, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 21:20, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| if [ ${IS_UPGRADE} = 1 ] ; then
| einfo Removing old version ${REMOVE_PKG}
|
| emerge -C ${REMOVE_PKG}
| fi
This code (or an equivalent kludge/hack) does
27.2.2006, 22:33:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:49:23 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| rhetorical question
| May I ask how is that related to webapp-config?
| /rhetorical question
It is related to Stuart, and hence utterly relevant to the conversation.
Ah
nothing that could be done here.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E
... still no signature ;)
pgprwDQAkXsrs.pgp
Description
the following change discussed
and who approved that?!
http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/handbook/hb-guide-ebuild.xml?r1=1.25r2=1.26root=gentoo
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op
to use non-default
setup, then you need to change default values, that's what common sense
dictates at least. And don't use the (non)-interactivity magical formular in
a context where it has zero sense.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net
-reader )
and then
emerge lighttpd apache a couple of servers here some random webapps here
I think it's pretty much obvious that this just won't work since such
virtual doesn't and won't exist.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371
28.2.2006, 15:39:40, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:49:13 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| No, that's not a policy document, ebuild policy is documented here:
|
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?style=printablepart=3chap=1
No, the whole
28.2.2006, 16:29:07, Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:08:05 +0100
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When and where has been the following change discussed and who
approved that?
http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/handbook/hb-guide-ebuild.xml
28.2.2006, 16:42:46, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:26:37 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| If you can't do any better, then please apologize for your conduct
| and false claims and shut up... TIA.
Sure I can do better. But you didn't originally ask for better, you
, they are private activity of those devs.
If you agree with the contents, please ask yourself if the current
discussion is necessary.
See above.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E
Primary key
28.2.2006, 17:35:32, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:11:58 +0100 Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Ok, sorry for being dumb :-)
| What exactly is the issue there? I don't see the issue in setting SLOT
| depending on ... uhm ... some variable. Looks kinda logical at
28.2.2006, 18:09:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:00:03 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| PVR includes the revision of an ebuild. This means that if a
| revbump is made on a webapp package to fix a critical flaw, users
| will still have the old broken package
28.2.2006, 18:11:57, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:02:11 + Renat Lumpau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:35:32PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Ebuilds can't override this either. Read on in the eclass and you'll
| notice that it checks that SLOT
28.2.2006, 18:38:10, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Sheesh, you'll probably claim that this isn't broken next too:
if [ ${IS_UPGRADE} = 1 ] ; then
einfo Removing old version ${REMOVE_PKG}
emerge -C ${REMOVE_PKG}
fi
No, I won't claim that... I'd rather love to know why
201 - 300 of 391 matches
Mail list logo
