On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:24:26 -0400
Mounir Lamouri wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Ulrich Mueller
> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, mrness wrote:
> >
> >> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> >> versions than ${PV}.
> >> Is that hard to create a new p
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:50:26 +0100
Alin Năstac wrote:
> Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> versions than ${PV}.
> Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
Um, why?
I'm not having six identical patches with different version numbers in
FILESDIR.
--
On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:54:02 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:51:00 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:22:36 +0100
> > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > > > * Am I to take it src_test is to remain in its current worthless
> > &
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 00:22:36 +0100
Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > * Am I to take it src_test is to remain in its current worthless
> > state?
> Yes, I'd like to see it enable by default as well, but we have to
> discuss that further. So, not suited for a fast eapi release.
Please fix all 'pkg fails t
On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 21:20:14 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Hi,
> lately i see that in our bugzilla most of the build reports are
> reported with localized build logs which we dont understand. This
> leads to us asking the user to run the emerge once more with LC_ALL=C.
>
> Wont it be nice to have
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:47:58 +0100
Alex Legler wrote:
> Hey,
>
> we have some changes to be made in gems.eclass for Ruby 1.9.1.
> Basically this introduces the possibility to install gems for multiple
> versions of Ruby.
>
> If anyone feels like reviewing, please review the following
> changes:
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 04:01:36 +0200
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> I'm collecting ideas from the wider development and contributing
> community on how to help maintainers and contributors get work done
> quicker, or rephrased - how to get more done in the limited time we
> have.
>
> This basically means
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:21:23 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Let's try something new. I would like to get opinions from as many
> people as possible about GLEP 55 and alternatives listed here in order
> to get some idea what the general developer pool thinks. Everyone is
> only allowed to post a sing
Alec Warner gentoo.org> writes:
> Somewhat ironically, had everyone been less stubborn last year when
> discussing this topic we could have embedded the EAPI in line X of the
> ebuild in 2008 and be using it now; instead of still discussing it.
>
> I don't expect new novel ideas out of this thre
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:15:25 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:54:38 +
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:51:11 +0100
> > Luca Barbato wrote:
> > > > 2. (with myeclass.eclass containing EAPI=2)
> > > >
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:54:38 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:51:11 +0100
> Luca Barbato wrote:
> > > 2. (with myeclass.eclass containing EAPI=2)
> > > -
> > > EAPI=1
> > > inherit myeclass
> >
> > Invalid
>
> QA violation, but legal and a pain in the ass.
I didn't th
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:43:09 -0700
Steve Dibb wrote:
> Richard Freeman wrote:
> > I still don't see why we need to be encoding metadata in filenames.
> > PERL doesn't care what a file extension is, python doesn't care,
> > bzip2 doesn't care, tar doesn't care, gzip doesn't care, and even
> > ld-l
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 18:55:37 -0500
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 21 February 2009 18:38:55 Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 18:27:10 -0500 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > looks like bash-4.0 has broken semicolon escaping in subshells.
> > > this comes up when
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 18:27:10 -0500
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> looks like bash-4.0 has broken semicolon escaping in subshells. this
> comes up when using find's -exec like we do in a few places in
> eclasses: ls=$(find "$1" -name '*.po' -exec basename {} .po \;); shift
> you can work around the issu
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:04 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Peter Alfredsen posted
> 20090215212907.00a73...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Sun, 15 Feb
> 2009 21:29:07 +0100:
>
> > +# Peter Alfredsen (15 Feb 2009)
> > +# Masking for removal in 30 days.
> > +# Fails to bui
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 23:53:51 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:46:54 +0100
> Luca Barbato wrote:
> > master is just a name, you may have the main development happen in
> > another branch (say devel) and the stabler tree is kept on the
> > master branch and you may want to tr
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 19:02:12 +0100
"Santiago M. Mola" wrote:
> net-p2p/nicotine+
I can take this one.
--
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect
treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:51:14 -0600
Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:54 AM, Ryan Hill
> wrote:
> > All bugs blocking #198121 having obviously correct (eg. missing
> > header) patches will be applied by me in the coming week. If you
> > have concerns about
On Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:07:58 +
Angelo Arrifano wrote:
> I would keep existing categories and add a new TAG metadata to
> existing ebuilds. Something like TAG="kde music player lyrics lastfm
> visualization" for amarok, as example.
>
> A public list of *ALLOWED* tags would be published on our
All bugs blocking #198121 having obviously correct (eg. missing header)
patches will be applied by me in the coming week. If you have concerns
about me touching your package (i swear i'll wash my hands first),
please let me know.
As always, applying these patches yourself makes me a happy monkey.
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:36:15 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Angelo Arrifano wrote:
> > # manual document installation
> > [ -n "${DOCS}" ] && dodoc ${DOCS}
> >
> > }
> >
>
> dodoc should have || die with it
Dieing on dodoc is a complete waste of time and effort. No one wants
the ebuild
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:47:04 -0800
Alec Warner wrote:
> Is GuideXML in fact a barrier for submission (do we get complaints
> about it?)
I seem to remember doc/newsletter people stating on multiple occasions
that they're happy to accept plain text submissions (feel free to beat
me if i hallucinat
On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:31:03 +0100
Benedikt Böhm wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 01:56:52AM +0100, Friedrich Oslage wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Benedikt Boehm (hollow) schrieb:
> > > hollow 09/01/10 21:41:41
> > >
> > > Modified: pack
On Sun, 11 Jan 2009 00:06:45 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:03:17 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > I'm really hoping this isn't a stable candidate. :P
>
> Is an earlier gcc 4.3 a stable candidate, or have those plans been
> abandoned?
>
&
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:22:50 -0500
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> not to be out done, gcc-4.3.2-r3 will include changes like some other
> distros are now carrying:
> - the -Wformat-security flag is enabled by default
> - the -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 flag is enabled by default
>
> if you dont want this stu
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:47:47 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> While I'm at it, is there anything useful to display metadata.xml?
> In particular, the long descriptions and use flags can be useful.
> With use.desc and especially the local version thereof going
> deprecated, and wi
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:12:23 +0100
Fabio Rossi wrote:
> I'm proposing to reorganize the files related to Gentoo
> inside /var/lib. Currently we have this situation (at least on my
> system):
>
> /var/lib/eselect
> /var/lib/gentoo/enews
> /var/lib/herdstat/
> /var/lib/module-rebuild
> /var/lib/po
On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:12:58 -0800
Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> The GLEP 42 news support [1] is going to be available in stable when
> sys-apps/portage-2.1.6 is marked stable later this month. I think
> the news code is prett
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:00:33 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote:
> "Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > That being said I still don't see the usefulness here.
> >
> > You seem to think that using the existing APIs for this data is
> > wrong, and I think the oppos
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:13:34 -0500
Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Instead of addressing archs as being slackers or not, this addresses
> it as a more granular layer of looking at ebuilds. Thanks to Richard
> Freeman for the initial proposal that I based this off of. Please
> give me fe
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 10:11:49 -0700
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Volkov wrote:
> > Seems that we already have everything you dreamed about:
> >
> > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=1#doc_chap4
> >
> > Take a look at PORTAGE_ELOG_SYSTEM. It eve
On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:31:34 +0100
Thomas Sachau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. i dont read it ;-)
> 2. it is around help with every sort of ebuilds, not only those in or
> for sunrise, so would have some "spam" e.g. for me
There have been a grand total of 20 messages since we added it to gmane
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:52:25 +0300
Peter Volkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> В Вск, 16/11/2008 в 15:33 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет:
> >
> > > - FEATURES=test failures;
> >
>
> And what we are su
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 17:04:33 -0500
Daniel Gryniewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Honestly, I don't want to be a dick to the arch teams. I really
> don't. But I *also* don't want them (or policy) to be a dick to me.
> That's my whole point; that requirement of never removing the last
> stable ebu
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:57:23 -0500
Daniel Gryniewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-11-17 at 19:08 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:10:57 -0500
> > Daniel Gryniewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun,
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:10:57 -0500
Daniel Gryniewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-16 at 18:38 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
>
>
>
> > The maintainer MUST NOT NEVER EVER NOT EVEN A LITTLE BIT remove the
> > latest stable ebuild of an arch without the ap
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:13:34 -0500
Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If an ebuild meets the time criteria above, and there are no
> technical issues preventing stabilization, then the maintainer MAY
[...] mark that ebuild as stable on every keyworded arch (that has a
stable keyword).
> If
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 17:24:34 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote:
> Guys, please remember that if you work something around, you should
> _not_ close the bug as RESO FIXED but keep the bug open so that the
> issue can be addressed and fixed _properly_. Otherwise we'll end up
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:31:47 +0100
Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > There is still no solution for things that do not break ABI, but get
> > rebuilt with different USE flags, for example the USE=esd fiasco
> > where to get rid o
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 18:31:47 +0100
Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > There is still no solution for things that do not break ABI, but get
> > rebuilt with different USE flags, for example the USE=esd fiasco
> > where to get rid of
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:43:55 -0500
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christoph Mende wrote:
> > Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
> > would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists.
>
> Since the new eclass is not version specific, how about simply
> "xfce.eclass
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 18:30:41 +0100
Jose Luis Rivero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to
> > ask maintainers check if their current stable packages build with
> > 4.3, and if not plea
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:30:09 +0100
Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to
> > ask maintainers check if their current stable packa
In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to ask
maintainers check if their current stable packages build with 4.3, and
if not please stabilize a version that does in the near future if at
all possible. Stabilizing this version is going to be a huge job due
to the number of
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:36:32 +0200
Markus Meier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> html 7
> editor6
> tools 6
> music 5
> http 5
> web 5
All way too genera
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:22:09 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:06:40 +0100
> > Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > Have a look at, for example, [1], where Mike already gave you an
> >> > answer one of the previous times we d
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 03:59:00 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>
> > what about this:
> > insinto /usr/share/doc/${P}/examples
> Is there any chance we can start using correctly quoted filenames
> across the board?
This is correctly quoted, so, yep.
--
gcc-por
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:15:16 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, x64 is the marketing name Microsoft made up for x86_64 (aka
> > amd64, ia32e and Intel 64), as "Windows for x86_64" doesn't sound
> > that sexy, and was later adopted by Sun and others.
> > ia64/Itanium doesn't h
On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 20:44:51 -0500
Jeremy Olexa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would suggest moving all the "slacking" arches to "experimental"
> until there is desire from the dev community (read: manpower) to
> support a stable tree again. Until then, it seems pretty pointless to
> keep assignin
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 10:17:05 -0700
Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Though I'm still not sure what happens when a package is in two
> > unrelated sets..
> >
> &
On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 03:44:20 -0700
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For projects where the upstream has vanished off the face of the
> planet, and the project was reasonably obscure, but the code works
> fine still, there's problems with either the requirements of HOMEPAGE
> or the r
On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 00:05:53 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 02:51:53 +
> "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ryan, I disagree with your proposal. If I enable a use flag for the
> > "meta
On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 02:51:53 +
"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Zac Medico wrote:
> > Ryan Hill wrote:
> >> Though what happens if a package is in both sets which have
> >> conflicting flags in package.use? I would say th
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 22:24:35 +0200
Jeroen Roovers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please people,
>
>
>if you want to get something tested, then don't mask it.
Um... no? One thing that package.mask has always been used for is
temporarily masking a package until it can be tested and then unleash
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:31:46 -0700
Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can package.use syntax be extended to allow set entries?
> > @compiz-fusion -gnome kde kde4
>
> Perhaps, but we need to clarify how that sort of setting will affect
> nested sets. For example, if @compiz-fusion contains
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 22:03:53 -0500
Jeremy Olexa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm thinking that a virtual/fonts package would be a good addition to
> the tree. We have hit this issue in Gentoo Prefix where any font
> package would satisfy a dependency. I also have an open bug where a
> package dep
On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:05:43 +0300
Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexis Ballier kirjoitti:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> When EAPI 2 goes live built_with_use should probably die for most
> >> cases.
> >
> > I don't understand here: you mean die like being removed or die like
> > the die call in
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:38:43 -0700
Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Please consider a blocker syntax extension, for inclusion in EAPI 2,
> which will serve to indicate that conflicting packages may be
> temporarily inst
On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:05:07 +
"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We've been trying to find a way that
> will allow users to do an FHS compliant install if they want it,
> while at the same time still allowing those that are not interested
> in it to keep using the curre
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:02:02 +0200
Jeroen Roovers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:17:48 -0600
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
>
> No.
>
> Any ebuild should be published with
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:25:42 +0400
Peter Volkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> There are droid fonts package in the tree. Author states that they are
> apache licensed [1] (supposedly similar to google's android sdk) but
> license itself is not included in the package (only .ttf files ar
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:27:03 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >> b) Does it really matter?
> >
> > In the grand scheme of things, no. In the grand scheme of things,
> > you only *need* a single src_ function. From a maintainer
> > convenience perspective, ho
I have an interesting (to me anyways) question.
Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
It kinda seems to me the answer should be yes. I don't know if any PM
currently implements LICENSE filtering so there may not be any
technical reason for it yet. And so I guess it comes down to a
phi
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 02:12:13 +0300
Nikos Chantziaras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not that I have ever seen a package that breaks with --as-needed
> though. Of course that's just me.
Well, then, behold:
http://tinyurl.com/5jvkm9
Now you have. Enjoy. :)
--
gcc-porting,
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 18:37:06 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Loeser (Halcy0n) (QA project leader) said on 2008-07-24 that
> this policy doesn't exist. I understand that bug reports about
> LDFLAGS being ignored are usually fixed, so I ask for the formal
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:36:28 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to suggest new policy stating that packages should
> respect LDFLAGS. Small amount of packages which ignore LDFLAGS should
> be patched to respect them. Such patches are usually small a
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:13:01 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just curious, what are the benefits of not having world include
> system?
Nevermind, I just found your post explaining this.
--
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:01:23 -0400
Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With the new split in Portage where system set packages are not
> considered in an "emerge -auDNv world" unless something in world
> RDEPENDs on it brings about a few issues.
Just curious, what are the benefits of no
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 17:55:00 +
"Raul Porcel (armin76)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> armin76 08/07/18 17:55:00
>
> Modified: mozcoreconf-2.eclass
> Log:
> Enable by default mozilla's optimization
> +IUSE="${IUSE} custom-optimization"
> +
Could you use custom-cflags for
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:20:15 -0400
Philip Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 080717 Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> > Philip Webb wrote:
> >> [2] http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-awk1.html
> >> '03 Jul 2008' has been added since I sent my comment to them
> >> yesterday ! However, the incorre
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:09:36 -0400
Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:39:00 +0200
> > Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> On 15-07-2008 15:32:32 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> >&
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:39:00 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 15-07-2008 15:32:32 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > all,
> >
> > I'm at the point that -Wl,-O1 appears to be successful. It's time
> > to toss on -Wl,--hash-style=gnu. The issue is that we need glibc
> > 2.5 or high
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:40:13 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Slacker arches
> --
> Preparation: vapier needs to send the post 4+ hours before the
> meeting. (Mike, is this ever going to happen?)
I believe he's out of the country until August.
--
gcc-porting,
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 21:15:32 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008-07-09 15:45:15 Doug Goldstein napisał(a):
> > Luca Barbato wrote:
> > > Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > >> On 30-06-2008 17:35:08 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar
> > >> Arahesis wrote:
> > How
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008 20:49:43 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 19:14 Tue 08 Jul , Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 21:02:37 -0700
> > Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think it's worth
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 21:02:37 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think it's worth losing track of the CVS history just so we
> can have something in a different place that ultimately is hardly
> useful to anyone.
Maybe it's time to test the feasibility of moving to SVN again
On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 10:10:14 -0400
Jim Ramsay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's an interesting solution for those who find it annoying though:
> Just file your own 0-day bump request in bugzilla. In theory some
> users would find this and just CC themselves on it. Other users could
> be shushed w
On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:23:01 +0200
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 04:53:06PM +, Marijn Schouten (hkbst)
> > wrote:
> >> hkbst 08/06/28 16:53:06
> >>
> >> Mod
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:07:03 -0700
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 4. If we have a valid category name, but no valid package atoms (this
> may be a new or misspelt package), try to figure out which team might
> want it. Use the category-level metadata.xml file.
I wonder how often
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:42:49 +0300
Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> > On Saturday 28 June 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis kirjoitti:
> >>> I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> >>> following flag
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch wrote:
> > "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Marius Mauch wrote:
> > I don't really see how making PV not read-only is any easier
> > than using MY_PV. Did you expect changing PV to magically
> >
On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:17:48 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 24-06-2008 14:15:10 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
> wrote:
> > I would like to suggest that default LDFLAGS in Gentoo contain the
> > following flags: "-Wl,-O1,--hash-style=gnu,--sort-common".
> >
> > -
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:20:03 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> > Upstream clearly states that a gmp build which tests have failed
> > shouldn't be used. I bet they deny support for users who fail to
> > follow that indication ;-)
>
> gmp isn't a key compone
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:24 -0700
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:09 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:55:29 +0200
> > "Santiago M. Mola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution
>
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 12:16:00 +
"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The current nominees and the state of their acceptance can
> be checked on
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/voting-logs/council-2008-nominees.xml
> If there's someone else you would like to nominate
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 22:16:36 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bernd Steinhauser wrote:
> > Wow, impressive.
> >
> > Actually, you can't be serious...
>
> I am.
> > GLEP 54 for quite some time now and it works very well.
>
> adds nothing to - and sets usage as is.
> > I just d
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008 19:57:45 +0200
Alexis Ballier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The other option is to p.mask and last rite it, breaking mips and s390
> trees, leaving them without tex support at all. This would also
> leave arm and sh with only ptex as tex support. Thus that is not
> really an opt
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 18:34:21 +0200
Bernd Steinhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ryan Hill schrieb:
> No, the idea behind ESCM_LOGDIR was different.
> If you just want the revision of the current installed thing, you can
> grep through the environment.
>
> ESCM_LOGDIR m
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:55:27 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > So every user will have a different _preN version which would vary
> > depending on how often they rebuild the package and that has
> > absolutely no correlation with
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:32:22 +
Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok, here's a silly idea -
>
> tag the ebuilds with metadata. We already have RESTRICT, why not add
> a "LIVE" variable. The package manager can then treat all ebuilds
> with that tag differently. Scripts can find them
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:01:15 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 14:27:22 +0200
> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Many of them applies as well to the alternative proposal, I wonder
> > how you could say we, council, had to vote the other proposal give
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 11:53:51 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:19:32 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> I'm confused. If I have a gcc-4.4.0.live ebuild which checks out
> >>> rev. 136737, after the merge do I hav
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:35:52 +0200
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment, I'd be against this
> simply because it would require the PM to be aware of the current
> revision of the repository and to transform it into a integer value
> (trivial fo
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 06:19:16 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 23:16:04 -0600
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > if people are just going to RESTRICT tests when they fail (and they
> > will, because it's a hell o
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:42:34 +0200
Bo Ørsted Andresen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Err.. Maybe this could have been phrased better but then I did expect
> you would look at the bug before commenting. The idea is to enable
> tests by default in EAPI 2 and beyond and let them stay off by
> default in
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 22:00:55 +0100
"Alex Howells" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/7 Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > Thanks, but I'm not sure what I could do to fix this crazy thing.
> >
>
> Precisely why you'd be perfect for
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 15:46:10 -0400
Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I nominate:
>
> dev-zero
> dirtyepic
> zmedico
Thanks, but I'm not sure what I could do to fix this crazy thing.
--
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect
treecleaner,
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 01:08:24 +0200
Patrick Börjesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > just picking a random mail to reply to.
> >
> > gentoo-project people! this is why it exists.
> >
> >
>
> Actually, it was stated in the originating mail (starting the
> nomination period) that "All nominations
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 22:41:40 +0300
Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:52:35 +
> Ferris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> kirjoitti:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> >
> > I think nominations are open. I nominate
>
> Then I'd like to nom
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:31:58 -0600
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > Just a quick thought looking over a couple ebuilds. It seems most
> > times anyone does a error, elog, einfo, or similar. They start and
> > end with a few blank lines. Calls with no argu
501 - 600 of 906 matches
Mail list logo
