[gentoo-dev] git history older than "proj/gentoo: Initial commit" (56bd759)

I'd like to start with: kudos for the very skilfully performed migration from CVS to git! I just committed a simple changed and it worked great. I was curious and started exploring the repo a little bit, and the initial commit says: > This commit is the start of the NEW history. > Any historical

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: EAPI 4 deprecated & ban

On 8/15/15 7:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2015-08-15, o godz. 00:05:57 > Johannes Huber napisał(a): >> if we want to attract more contributors we should consider to have one >> supported EAPI (latest). EAPI 4 is the last not marked as deprecated >> (< EAPI 5). The move in ebuilds from EAPI 4

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: EAPI 4 deprecated & ban

On 8/15/15 3:16 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > Secondly, though, conversion to EAPI5 is not actually trivial, there > are a couple of things, 'usex' related for instance, that also need > to be taken care of. If it was just a matter of running a sed -e > 's/^EAPI=4/EAPI=5/' on all in-tree ebuilds t

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: EAPI 4 deprecated & ban

On 8/16/15 3:29 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > They are deprecated already: > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/metadata/layout.conf > > Deprecated means stop adding them, and move away from them. Repoman > will give you a warning about them. Is anything blocking deprecating EAPI4 in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Better way to direct upstream bugs upstream?

On 8/30/15 12:02 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > Or upstream might be a monolithic giant like Google where their > upstream bug tracking is some pointless forum where you get ignored by > the people actually working on things. Ouch. Do you have specific examples? I'm not denying they exist. I just had

Re: [gentoo-dev] samba (and related) packages are in desperate need of help

On 9/1/15 3:24 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: > * samba upstream is extremely uncooperative. Best example is that we > still have some automagic dependencies [5] in samba's build system and > upstream is not very keen on fixing these. > > [...] > > [5] https://bugs.gentoo.org/489748 > https://bug

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Better way to direct upstream bugs upstream?

On 9/3/15 10:16 PM, Andrew Udvare wrote: > Chromium team is no different in this regard. No options, for anything. > It is extremely annoying when they implement 'privacy-violating' > features like the previously visited sites in the New tab (before you've > entered a URL), with no option to disabl

[gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support

A user asked for optional gtk3 support in www-client/chromium: However, reading e.g. says this: > having USE=gtk3 to enable gtk+-3 instead of gtk+-2 support is > forbidden

Re: [gentoo-dev] samba (and related) packages are in desperate need of help

On 9/9/15 4:00 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: > On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 21:23:24 +0200 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: >> I don't see any references to upstream bug reports, and so no evidence >> of upstream being uncooperative. >> >> Are there any public links that you could share

Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support

On 9/9/15 5:48 PM, hasufell wrote: > There was a tracker on bugzilla about it at some point, but people > didn't care enough, so I stopped filing bugs. Neither the gnome team > nor QA had a strong enough opinion to enforce consistency here over > the whole tree. Looks like that was

Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support

On 9/10/15 8:05 PM, hasufell wrote: > a) the gnome maintainers already said they are not interested in > supporting it indefinitely (they are the maintainers of gtk+ as well) Aren't there at least some gtk2-only apps? It seems to me we're not that close to removal of gtk2 from the tree. I'm also

Re: [gentoo-dev] Request to add ~> atom prefix operator on Portage.

On 9/14/15 6:35 AM, konsolebox wrote: > Many times we need to match packages like this: something-1.0.2a.* Could you give specific examples, i.e. what packages, what dependencies, why is that needed? Paweł signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Request to add ~> atom prefix operator on Portage.

On 9/14/15 9:13 AM, konsolebox wrote: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. > wrote: >> On 9/14/15 6:35 AM, konsolebox wrote: >>> Many times we need to match packages like this: >>> something-1.0.2a.* >> >> Could you give s

Re: [gentoo-dev] LibreSSL import plan

On 9/29/15 3:32 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > The thing is that I think the libressl authors are shooting themselves > in the feet. When upstreams do this sort of thing they think they're > making the upgrade path easier by not changing their symbol names. In > reality, they're making the upgrade pat

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-5 news item wrt C++ ABI

On 10/3/15 7:30 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:24:11 -0400 > Mike Frysinger wrote: >> On 03 Oct 2015 13:38, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >>> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 22:13:09 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-5 >>> >>> This means that two years from now

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-5 news item wrt C++ ABI

On 10/3/15 4:13 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > Title: GCC 5 Defaults to the New C++11 ABI > Author: Mike Frysinger > Content-Type: text/plain > Posted: 2015-10-02 > Revision: 1 > News-Item-Format: 1.0 > Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-5 > > GCC 5 uses the new C++ ABI by default. When buildin

<    1   2   3   4   5   6