Or you can become a dev and maintain this package yourself.
Zhang Le
Simplifid Chinese Doc/GMN Lead
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
are the contact for any problems/troubles.
#gentoo-cn
Thanks Robin!
Zhang Le
had something worth listening to, but a proxy is more than just a
> platform to talk - any mailing list subscriber already has that.
Agreed.
--
Zhang, Le
Gentoo/Loongson Developer
http://zhangle.is-a-geek.org
0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
pgpDo0wS2P2Fi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Some packages don't provide standard "setup.py". Take a look at the attachment.This is a new ebuld.So my suggestion is to add a new variable to distutils.eclass, e.g. SETUP.PY, if it's set, then use it, otherwise let it defaults to "
setup.py".Looking forward to hear
On 7/17/06, Alastair Tse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 00:49 +0800, Zhang Le wrote:> Some packages don't provide standard "setup.py".> Take a look at the attachment.> This is a new ebuld.I agree with Stefan, just put a symlink in from whatever the
a package will be added to the gentoo portage system.
Any suggestion?
Are thoses software widely used in Chinese user community?
If so, I can put them in gentoo-china overlay.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
http://zhllg.blogspot.com
http://zh.gentoo-wiki.com
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/pgubook
http
recuiting me!
You can just call me Robert.
Or if you prefer to call me my Chinese name, please call me Zhang Le
whenever possible. Thanks!
In Chinese tradition, family name is placed before given name. ;)
>
> Le is joining us from Hong Kong (yes, that's in China boys and girls)
where
> h
ng and
recuiting me!
You can just call me Robert.
Or if you prefer to call me my Chinese name, please call me Zhang Le
whenever possible. Thanks!
In Chinese tradition, family name is placed before given name. ;)
> Le is joining us from Hong Kong (yes, that's in China boys and girls) whe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Duncan wrote:
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> excerpted below, on Thu, 17 May 2007 23:16:59 +0800:
>
>>> Le is joining us from Hong Kong (yes, that's in China boys and girls)
>>> wher
nyway.
>
> What if Donnie had used s/changes/new features/ ? Then his proposal
> makes much more sense.
I agree that new features makes more sense here. USE flag description in
metadata.xml is just an example of new feature, IMO.
My 2 HK$, ;)
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
variable in bash can you think of?
Is it that hard to come up with a way to normalized the definition?
Just like charset code normalization, e.g. from UTF-8 to utf8?
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
the process.
And you are keeping scolding people for not understanding the process.
So, why not introduce the process a little bit?
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
sefully...
So please make those people understand, so they can comment usefully.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
uild's
content has any restrictions.
You can extrace the definition from file content no matter how it is defined
using whatever way you like.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
the contents :)
Exactly.
And this way is not elegant.
File name is used to uniquely identify a file in a system, not to decide how
the content of the file should be interpreted.
Never ever seen a file type extension with a version number.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260
EAPI's. And we should set a time constraint on the transition.
Other than that we can only have one working EAPI which all package managers
conforms to.
Otherwise, I think we may be risking forking the portage tree.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 658
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 02:52:16 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Exactly.
>> And this way is not elegant.
>> File name is used to uniquely identify a file in a system, not to
>> decide how the content of the file should be in
wn their concerns about their
distro.
If someone don't understand, we should help them to understand, not just
exclude them from this discussion.
They should learn, however we should at least give them directions.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2007 8:01 PM, Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How many EAPI's do we have now?
>
> In Portage tree we have "0" (default) and "1". There are others in
> external projects, for example "prefix&quo
ng ebuildy things, there are a lot more useful places to
> start.
It worths. It will influence our future.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
year before we can use it.
Why rush on this thing?
If the EAPI's feature is not freezing, I think we should do nothing but wait.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:09:44 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I see it differently.
>> Everyone participated in this discussion has shown their concerns
>> about their distro.
>> If someone don't understand, we sh
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:49:04 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It should not appear as a black box, and effectively prevent normal
>> gentoo users and developers from contributing to decisions which may
>> have a great impa
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:52:04 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 03:14:12 +0100
>>> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:26:06 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> And no, it's not worth writing them. If people have time to spend
>>> documenting ebuildy things, there are a lot more useful places to
>>> start
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:38:43 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I am afraid if we want all people accept this GLEP wholeheartedly,
>> someone ought to be stand out and take this responsibility.
>
> No no, we want all the people w
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:34:07 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> * We have to wait a year before we can use it.
>> Why rush on this thing?
>> If the EAPI's feature is not freezing, I think we should do nothing
>> but
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:23:08 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I really don't see the necessity to have so many EAPI's
>
> A new EAPI is needed for new features, so new EAPIs will be needed in
> the future. Equa
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:51:03 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> That's the problem about the agreement between PM and ebuild.
>>
>> If this is agreed upon
>>>>>>> import vim-spell using language="en&q
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:56:35 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> By "all people", I mean all those who have participated in this
>> discussion. They shown their concern.
>> We should listen to what they said.
>
&
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:03:25 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We can't take the risk of forking/splitting ourselves in exchange of
>> only a little features.
>
> EAPI introduces no risk of that. Quite the opposite -- it re
Thomas Pani wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:59:14 +0800
>> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> And file extension like welcome.html.fr is quite self-explanatory.
>>> But an total outsider has no chance to deduce what the 1 in eb
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> On Thursday 20 of December 2007 19:29:22 Zhang Le wrote:
>> So please make those people understand, so they can comment usefully.
>
> Are we in the elementary school or something? This is really getting
> ridiculous.
IMHO, what is more ridiculous is
Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Friday 21 December 2007 05:25:00 Zhang Le wrote:
>> The question is really simple.
>> Whether we should have two different place to define EAPI?
>
> We need two places because it wasn't implemented properly in the first place
> an
not force user to upgrade their PM?
After all, upgrading is part of our normal life.
Now I will try read portage to understand how the metadata generation process
works and try to make a doc of it.
So before that, I will probably be not so responsive.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerpr
y give the EAPI of any current
> or future ebuild given that ebuild's filename (hint: you can't).
Simple.
Whatever you'd like to have in the suffix, we can put it on the first line of
the ebuild.
Just go and get it, and that's the EAPI.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:09:27 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> IMHO, what is more ridiculous is keeping ask other to be quiet in a
>> discussion which is supposed to be open to everyone who cares about
>> it.
>
> It's
Luca Barbato wrote:
> Still I think we should just postpone this discussion and get a 2008.0 out.
And postpone until some doc is out.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:01:23 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Luca Barbato wrote:
>>> Still I think we should just postpone this discussion and get a
>>> 2008.0 out.
>> And postpone until some doc is out.
>
>
Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Thursday 20 December 2007 20:01:55 Zhang Le wrote:
>> IMO, we can not have more than two EAPI's simultaneously.
>
> That defeats the whole purpose of having EAPIs. Which is to keep a sane
> upgrade path...
Upgrading happens between tw
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:55:50 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> Note *the way things are currently*. If you think this is untrue,
>>> provide an algorithm that will correctly give the EAPI of an
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:49:10 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>>> As long as there is an agreement in any given point of time, it is
>>>> OK. Such as, put your EAPI definition on the first
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 12:27:31 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> But I am not sick of EAPI's. You see? I am sick of so *many* EAPI's.
>
> What? All two of them that you need to know about, where the second
> one is the firs
Zhang Le wrote:
> I have just created a page of EAPI on wikipedia, let's improve it together.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EAPI
And later convert it to guidexml and put it on gentoo.org, of course.
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B9
Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 04:58:28PM +0800, Zhang Le wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:09:27 +0800
>>> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> IMHO, what is more ridiculous is keeping ask other to be
Richard Freeman wrote:
> Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 06:01:04PM +0800, Zhang Le wrote:
>>> All could be get before sourcing.
>>> I know you'd say people will use all syntaxes to define. But how many are
>>> there? EAPI=1, EAPI=&qu
Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 06:01:04PM +0800, Zhang Le wrote:
>>> Your algorithm:
>>>
>>> Does not work for existing ebuilds that have implicit EAPI 0.
>> That's obvious. If no suffix, just treat it as EAPI 0.
>>
Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Zhang Le wrote:
>> Zhang Le wrote:
>>> I have just created a page of EAPI on wikipedia, let's improve it together.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EAPI
>> And later convert it to guidexml and put it on gentoo.org, of course.
>
> W
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:49:32 +0800
> Zhang Le <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> When a new version comes out, we should educate developers about it
>> and encourage them to convert their ebuilds to use new EAPI.
>
> No, we shouldn't. Peopl
Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> Their docs are usually the source.
And files under Documentation
And they have a policy which requires them to write a doc for any new
feature/functionality to be accepted
--
Zhang Le, Robert
GPG key ID: 1E4E2973
Fingerprint: 0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C
gt; orphaned packages if we potentiate proxy-maint.
++
IMO giving proxy-maintainer due credit and publicity, meaning make it a formal
position, could solve the very problem Anant's proposal intended to solve.
Zhang Le
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On 15:53 Sun 12 Jul , Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> The output produces line like
>
> MISMATCH "gentoo-china" (layman-global) versus "china" (repo_name)
>
I have just changed gentoo-china overlay's repo_name to gentoo-china.
--
Zhang, Le
Gentoo/L
e.keywords files (which as I understand might be
> by design), so I'm unable to put together a stage from the versions
> I'd like to stabilize. Are your recent o32 stages straight-up ~mips?
> Can you post your spec files somewhere?
My way was to keyword those ebuilds and put them in my overlay. Not decent, but
works. -_-
--
Zhang, Le
Gentoo/Loongson Developer
http://zhangle.is-a-geek.org
0260 C902 B8F8 6506 6586 2B90 BC51 C808 1E4E 2973
pgpnsdLAmWNHN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
53 matches
Mail list logo