[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] flag-o-matic.eclass: bugfix for get-flag()

On Sun, 15 May 2016 21:35:41 +0200 rindeal wrote: > apart from the tests, the patch now looks like this: Please posts the tests too. -- pgpudg4Ys0VCN.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: eclass/

On Sun, 15 May 2016 08:40:39 +0900 Aaron Bauman wrote: > On Saturday, May 14, 2016 9:54:11 AM JST Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > > On Friday, May 13, 2016 4:52:09 PM JST Ian Delaney wrote: > > >> On Sat, 7

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: eclass/

On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On Sat, 7 May 2016 21:19:31 + (UTC) > "Joerg Bornkessel" wrote: > > > commit: 66afcab271f65b97330e610040ad3acc1b812a03 > > Author: Joerg Bornkessel gentoo org> > > AuthorDate: Sat

[gentoo-dev] Re: games.eclass policy

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:08:48 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:06:29 -0700 > Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > > Well, maybe it's because you can talk to

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: intel-sdp-r1.eclass

On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 15:35:12 +0100 Michał Górny wrote: > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 14:37:41 +0100 > "Justin Lecher (jlec)" wrote: > > On 15/02/16 13:59, Michał Górny wrote: > > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:16:53 +0100 > > > "Justin Lecher (jlec)"

[gentoo-dev] Re: Uncoordinated changes

On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:58:10 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: > Well, if debugging is your only concern, on the system you're going to > debug from: > touch herds.xml Don't do that. rhill@tundra /usr/portage/dev-util/creduce $ repoman RepoMan scours the neighborhood... [INFO]

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC: Patches for wxwidgets.eclass

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 10:21:40 +0100 "Justin Lecher (jlec)" <j...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 02/02/16 23:36, Ryan Hill wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 12:08:28 +0100 > > Justin Lecher <j...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > >> while track

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC: Patches for wxwidgets.eclass

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 17:07:48 -0800 Daniel Campbell wrote: > I see nothing wrong with discussing changes to parts of the tree that > will affect other developers. Bugzilla is nice and all, but imo it's > more of an AND thing instead of an OR thing. If the bug is already > present,

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH 0/5] RFC: Patches for wxwidgets.eclass

On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 12:08:28 +0100 Justin Lecher wrote: > while tracking down the following error when running "egencache" > > GENTOO.GIT//eclass/wxwidgets.eclass: line 84: get_libdir: command not found > GENTOO.GIT//eclass/wxwidgets.eclass: line 84: get_libdir: command not

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH v1] enable gccgo for all platform

You need to either do a compile test or query the compiler in some way to ensure the needed support is there. Look at the fortran virtual and fortran-2 eclass for an example. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 pgphr6MQ7TfOv.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: ChangeLog - Infra Response; update 2015/11/11, potential impact to 30min rsync cycle

ver technical > matters. Newest first is the usual order (e.g. it agrees with the > default of git log), and ChangeLog having different order from > ChangeLog-20* seems rather confusing to me. I imagine it breaks emerge --changelog output as well? -- Ryan Hillpsn: d

[gentoo-dev] Re: ssl vs openssl vs libressl vs gnutls USE flag foo

ould see exactly how these flags interact with each other. Something like (emerge -pv): ssl [ (openssl) libressl gnutls ] - if USE ssl then pick one of, default openssl if none chosen ssl [[ (openssl) libressl gnutls ]] - if USE ssl then one or more of... etc. But I suppose that's another topic. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 pgp616RCHiArF.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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

../../src/tcs/libtcs.a(libtcs_a-tcsps.o): In function `psfile_get_parent_uuid_by_uuid': tcsps.c:(.text+0x3e8): undefined reference to `read_data' bwm-ng.o: In function `main': bwm-ng.c:(.text.startup+0x1d3): undefined reference to `get_iface_stats' Rebuilding won't help with these of course. --

[gentoo-dev] Re: moving gcc-5.2 to unstable

le they really do have to emerge -e @world after this one or they could have a bad time. FWIW I updated one system from 4.9 to 5.2 by rebuilding ~700 packages in random order just to see how bad the ABI breakage would be and only ran into it once. I may have just gotten lucky though. -- Ryan Hill

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

veloperblog.redhat.com/2015/02/05/gcc5-and-the-c11-abi/ > https://blogs.gentoo.org/blueness/2015/03/10/the-c11-abi-incompatibility-problem-in-gentoo/ > LGTM. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 pgp8sN8qTZUiO.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: ALLARCHES and the maintainer action(s)

first place. > [0] I am pretty sure some arches will want to opt out of this > scheme, at least for some more critical packages. ALLARCHES shouldn't be used on critical packages. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3

[gentoo-dev] Re: how to add a new package with git?

hat is this warning? A couple days ago I started seeing it every time I sync even though I've yet to push anything to git. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 pgpc6afeYWfel.pg

[gentoo-dev] Re: Referencing bug reports in git

the job done. I don't care that much either. We never had URLs in the changelogs before so it's not like we're losing anything. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463

[gentoo-dev] Re: Referencing bug reports in git

://bugs.gentoo.org/333531 (or whatever is decided on). That way everyone can use whatever they like best and it'll all come out consistent. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463

[gentoo-dev] Re: Referencing bug reports in git

-Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/504321 or 504321 Idon'tcarewhich If we're limiting the summary to 1 line, 70-75 chars, manditory cat/package and bug number there's not a lot of room to summarize in. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets

[gentoo-dev] Re: Referencing bug reports in git (WAS: Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: sci-libs/opencascade/)

remember arguing about it. So let's save some time an irritability now and pick something. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 pgpjwTP4s_CiU.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital

[gentoo-dev] Re: Git Migration: go-live!

of this, is there an idiot's guide on how make the Gentoo? -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 pgpgeqSe7dvLl.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: Referencing bug reports in git (WAS: Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: sci-libs/opencascade/)

from a keyboard to a mouse — a terrible waste of time, at least in my case with my typing speed. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko Also the URL should be https://bugs.gentoo.org/557022 so already that's wrong. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain

[gentoo-dev] Re: Git Migration: go-live!

On Sun, 9 Aug 2015 13:22:43 +0200 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: On 08/09/2015 12:16 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: On Sun, 9 Aug 2015 05:36:16 + Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sat, Aug 08, 2015 at 05:47:14PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:39

[gentoo-dev] Re: Referencing bug reports in git

the bug only in the commit message description? Or do we say: * bug number in summary optional * bug number in description mandatory via Gentoo-Bug: 1234 The latter I hope. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864

[gentoo-dev] Re: Importance of SLOTs on Java dependencies

and what it wanted me to do. Can you add a comment to the eclass (maybe a link to your mail which explained things well) and a pointer to the eclass in the message? -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92

[gentoo-dev] Dropping GCC maintainership

to be responsible for holding up any work while I figure things out. Thanks, -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: crossdev and multilib interference

be considered an upstream response. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: crossdev and multilib interference

you've done something dumb. Stop doing that and things should work better. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: crossdev and multilib interference

that and we'll have to take you out behind the woodshed. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

and report bugs, and if a package doesn't work with it and doesn't strip it I think we should consider it a package bug now. I think if a package breaks with any of the -f/-g flags that strip-flags considers safe it's a legitimate package bug. -- Ryan Hillpsn

[gentoo-dev] Re: svn{.overlays,}.gentoo.org hosting discontinued; git{.overlays,}.gentoo.org hosting merging

/gnustep (129 days ago) proj/alt (148 days ago) Are only these being migrated? That's what the bug implies but I'm confused by all remaining repos above. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

people could test it. Did anyone actually try it out? I honestly want to know - if no one is testing masked versions then there's no point keeping them masked for as long as I usually do. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 09:48:53 -0400 Anthony G. Basile bluen...@gentoo.org wrote: On 06/10/14 10:35, Magnus Granberg wrote: tisdag 10 juni 2014 14.22.11 skrev Jeroen Roovers: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:46:56 -0600 Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org wrote: Yes. But now you've got me worried. We

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 14:22:11 +0200 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:46:56 -0600 Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org wrote: Yes. But now you've got me worried. We have to build gcc itself with -fno-stack-protector. Does compiling something with that flag give

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

v2: Restrict by arch -- Title: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector Author: Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2014-06-10 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: =sys-devel/gcc-4.8.3 Display-If-Keyword: amd64 Display-If-Keyword: arm Display-If-Keyword

[gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

? -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

Title: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector Author: Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2014-06-10 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: =sys-devel/gcc-4.8.3 Beginning with GCC 4.8.3, Stack Smashing Protection (SSP) will be enabled by default. The 4.8

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] News item: GCC 4.8.3 defaults to -fstack-protector

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014 04:31:27 +0200 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:16:02 -0600 Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org wrote: Beginning with GCC 4.8.3, Stack Smashing Protection (SSP) will be enabled by default.[..] .. on supported architectures. Right? Yes

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Removing src_test from www-client/chromium

to give people an actual incentive to do it. So +1. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: Adding -l (--ignore-whitespace) to EPATCH_COMMON_OPTS

On Thu, 15 May 2014 07:21:58 +0200 Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, 14 May 2014, Ryan Hill wrote: I'm a lazy bum and I'm tired of rebasing patches that fail due to whitespace. Is this doable or would it make the universe explode? Please don't. There are languages where

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: enabling ipc-sandbox network-sandbox by default

the latter implicitly. As Rich noted, we do not enable distcc by default so there's no reason why we can't enable conflicting options by default. Probably best to make FEATURES=distcc disable network-sandbox then. People enabling it are explicitly saying they want to access the network. -- Ryan

[gentoo-dev] Adding -l (--ignore-whitespace) to EPATCH_COMMON_OPTS

I'm a lazy bum and I'm tired of rebasing patches that fail due to whitespace. Is this doable or would it make the universe explode? -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: enabling ipc-sandbox network-sandbox by default

it on everyone. Otherwise +1. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: enabling ipc-sandbox network-sandbox by default

On Mon, 12 May 2014 11:39:10 +0200 Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 12 May 2014 00:47:17 -0600 Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org wrote: 1. cgroup -- puts all processes spawned by ebuild to cgroup, and kills all of them once phase exits (prevents leaving orphans), 2. ipc

[gentoo-dev] Re: LTO use in the tree

expected to work. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: LTO use in the tree

On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 08:45:31 + (UTC) Martin Vaeth mar...@mvath.de wrote: Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org wrote: One thing I forgot to mention - LTO can also have detrimental effect on certain architectures. On some (eg. ppc), performance can actually be degraded due to increased register

[gentoo-dev] LTO use in the tree

, but you'll generally have to do the legwork. And like I said, most aren't going to be backportable. Please take these things into consideration when deciding whether or not this feature is worth it. Thanks. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain

[gentoo-dev] Re: LTO use in the tree

On Sun, 20 Apr 2014 21:14:51 -0600 Ryan Hill rh...@gentoo.org wrote: Hey all, As more and more packages are starting to add LTO flags automatically through their build systems, I thought I'd point out a couple things: - LTO utterly destroys debug info. Flags like -g are incompatible

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] waf-utils.eclass: respect CFLAGS in linking command

} ${WAF_BINARY} \ --prefix=${EPREFIX}/usr \ $@ \ configure || die configure failed Good. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:26:18 +0200 Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote: Bye bye distribution level consistency :-( The last time we had distribution level consistency was the moment between the first and second packages getting committed to the tree. -- Ryan Hill

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

would need eight of them for 2.8 alone. And I don't know how we would name the ebuilds (-r100,-r200,... ugh). -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:09:53 -0500 Alexandre Rostovtsev tetrom...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sat, 2014-02-22 at 14:57 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: wxGTK not only splits up libraries by version and toolkit, but also by charset and debug/release. If we had to use different SLOTs rather than USE flags

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 15:50:17 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:09:53 -0500 Alexandre Rostovtsev tetrom...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sat, 2014-02-22 at 14:57 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: wxGTK not only splits up libraries by version and toolkit, but also

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: GTK USE flag situation (gtk, gtk2, gtk3; relevant to bug #420493)

. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Tightening EAPI rules

people time to update overlays afterwards. It won't be hard to move to 4 after that but it'll need another deprecation cycle. You'll have to ask Mike about glibc and binutils. Personally I think we should always keep the latest three EAPIs around, so 4, 5, and 6 (and 0). -- Ryan Hill

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: GTK USE flag situation (gtk, gtk2, gtk3; relevant to bug #420493)

in the eclass/eselect is tied directly into the SLOT. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: Default USE changes for fortran and mudflap?

time? I think for most people the number of times they've upgraded gcc far outweighs the number of times they've had to rebuild it to install a fortran package. We should optimize for the common case. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets

[gentoo-dev] Re: Default USE changes for fortran and mudflap?

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 09:24:20 +0100 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Dnia 2014-01-12, o godz. 01:53:47 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org napisał(a): fortran: Do we want to keep enabling fortran by default? The majority of users will never get the urge to install a fortran package

[gentoo-dev] Re: Default USE changes for fortran and mudflap?

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:53:47 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: While I'm adding USE defaults to toolchain.eclass and moving them out of the profiles, I thought now would be a good time to review a couple default flag settings. Okay, we'll be dropping fortran from the profiles

[gentoo-dev] Default USE changes for fortran and mudflap?

? The majority of users will never get the urge to install a fortran package, and the fortran eclass handles those that do. I think it should be treated as all the other optional languages and disabled by default, but I'd like to know if there are other opinions. -- Ryan Hillpsn

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

this use flag as a small example of things in toolchain which could probably be cleaned up if fresh eyes were to see things. Yes, and believe it or not I appreciate the input. I know I'm stubborn as hell but eventually common sense gets through. -- Ryan Hillpsn

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

) in glibc's common.eblit is fixed to. Cool, I forgot about that. ;) So default ssp is out in the tree :) FYI it's masked for testing for now. I will send out a news item soon. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:08:02 -0500 Anthony G. Basile bas...@opensource.dyc.edu wrote: On 01/10/2014 10:50 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: Having slept on it I'm starting to agree. My first argument was that on hardened ssp is -fstack-protector-all, which is much more expensive, and it adds -fstack

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

extra pointless. Personally I don't feel this is needed, and the added benefit of clearing up a bogus noblah use flag makes me smile. Zorry, do we really need this flag? Yes, we do. I want a way to disable it at a toolchain level. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

don't have a good reason. What gcc-config profiles get installed after this patch? -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:41:08 -0600 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:30:04AM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2014, 00:26:03 schrieb Ryan Hill: Please avoid noblah use flags. http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:30:46 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:29:26 -0500 Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the toolchain.eclass need some changes.

for doing this. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 00:53:17 +0100 Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Ryan Hill wrote: In case it's helpful here's what FOSSology[1] has to say about some common packages that people have uploaded to their demo server. I don't get your point here. The licenses

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

in a separate directory controlled by PORTDIR_NODIST or something. If the variable is unset then it's business as usual. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 06:50:06 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: I've always believed that when it comes down to it all Gentoo basically does is provide a link to some source code and a script to build and install it. Unless we violate someone's license by redistributing that source

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

enumerate every license in every distfile we distribute, which I don't think is a good idea. Or at least not on the basis of a theoretic user that might not actually exist. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 11:10:54 -0500 Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote: On 02/01/14 07:50 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: Maybe we could add RESTRICT=srcdist which would cause ebuilds to save their distfiles in a separate directory controlled by PORTDIR_NODIST or something. If the variable

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 16:20:09 -0500 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: That's only possible if we enumerate every license in every distfile we distribute, which I don't think is a good idea. Or at least not on the basis

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: new global USE flag srcdist

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 16:07:22 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 16:20:09 -0500 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Personally I don't have any use for ACCEPT_LICENSE at all, and having to specify the LICENSE for every single package in the tree is a lot more

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Add check for missing slot operators (bug 493742)

On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 23:14:11 +0100 sebastianlut...@gmx.de wrote: + slot.operator.missing: The ebuild depends on package with several... ^ a -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets

[gentoo-dev] Re: dev-lang/go

will sumarise why Portage and Go do not play well together. What's wrong with gccgo? (serious question, other than making sure it builds I haven't used it). -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-sound/umurmur: metadata.xml ChangeLog

? Fix your workflow, man ... and don't cause useless warning spam if you can avoid it. Oh FFS it's a USE flag. You guys have bigger fish to fry. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49

[gentoo-dev] Re: How to support C++11 in libraries?

that at least understands the flag in stable at least it wouldn't instantly break everything. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] econf: update configure/config.{sub,guess} atomically to avoid races

-helpers.sh b/bin/phase-helpers.sh index ec48c94..1a7ae03 100644 --- a/bin/phase-helpers.sh +++ b/bin/phase-helpers.sh @@ -469,6 +469,7 @@ unpack() { econf() { local x + local pid=${BASHPID} This requires bash 4.0. I'm all for it, but haters gonna hate. -- Ryan Hill

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] make.conf.5: Document PYTHON_TARGETS, bug #493180

, as it finally cleared up the relationship between the two of them for me. +1 -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: New Project: Bug Cleaners

by marking bugs they consider old. Another reason might be that we can assign related trackers to it. Well, once you touch an old bug it won't be old anymore, so you're going to need some way of keeping track of them. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting

[gentoo-dev] Re: Package removal without proper last-riting

not one of the offenders, just pointing out maybe some people missed the policy change as I did. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Looking for app-i18n/poedit maintainer

Is anyone interested in maintaining poedit? It's currently covered by wxwidgets and I check in on it a couple times a year for bumps/stabilization, but I don't use it myself. Feel free to add yourself or take it over if you're interested. Thanks. -- Ryan Hillpsn

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

problems to our users. The other hardened features, however, have more of an impact and probably don't belong in vanilla as already discussed. https://bugs.gentoo.org/484714 -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

dumps the compiler specs (the rules that determine what flags to use) to check if hardened features are enabled and only negates them if they are. The quick hack I did for my testing was failing that check so the flags weren't being disabled. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

to hold back progress. ;) In this case it seems every other distro is already doing this, so we're in good company. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 08:21:35 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: So does anyone have any objections to making -fstack-protector the default? Now is the time to speak up. So, in this world of all-or-nothing we want

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

. (and for the record I've changed my mind and would like to see this go forward, so please stop emailing me) -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 11:05:16 + (UTC) Martin Vaeth va...@mathematik.uni-wuerzburg.de wrote: Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: In any case this is a firm no. The increase in loading times for apps that link lots of libraries is significant (if it wasn't, we wouldn't need lazy loading

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

On Sat, 7 Sep 2013 18:10:42 + (UTC) Martin Vaeth va...@mathematik.uni-wuerzburg.de wrote: Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: * -fstack-protector{-all} No thank you. -fstack-protector has very limited coverage I'd say it covers most cases where bugs can be made, practically

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.8 unmasking

or so I saw reported. I don't see how that could happen without -ftree-loop-distribute-patterns. Can you dig up a link? -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.8 unmasking

On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 07:13:13 +0200 Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote: On 13/08/13 03:41, Ryan Hill wrote: I don't see any reason to keep this masked other than bug #416069, which needs to be fixed anyways. How does Friday sound? https://bugs.gentoo.org/416069 xorg-2.eclass: add

[gentoo-dev] GCC 4.8 unmasking

I don't see any reason to keep this masked other than bug #416069, which needs to be fixed anyways. How does Friday sound? https://bugs.gentoo.org/416069 xorg-2.eclass: add --disable-selective-werror to configure https://bugs.gentoo.org/461954 GCC 4.8 porting -- Ryan Hill

[gentoo-dev] Re: check-reqs* vs CFLAGS=-g

, it might magically disappear (memory areas get cleared out at -O0 but they might be re-used without clearing at any other -O level). If you're feeling adventurous you could try -Og -g with gcc 4.8. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org

[gentoo-dev] Re: check-reqs* vs CFLAGS=-g

can really do is warn people they may run out of space if they're using debugging options. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org 47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463 signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: Global USE flag: git

to when global and local flags had to be exclusive so you had to be careful about the wording. Nowadays where you can have a local description override a global one it's less important, but not completely so. -- Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >