Re: [gentoo-dev] Handling Launchpad SRC_URI

2009-01-25 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:38:32 -0800 Josh Saddler nightmo...@gentoo.org wrote: Right now, there's no canonical (heh) way of handling SRC_URI for projects that have their files at launchpad.net. We need a standard way of handling Launchpad SRC_URIs, similar to what we do with

Re: [gentoo-dev] RDEPEND definition in docs differ from official PMS specs

2009-01-17 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:09:49 +0100 Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote: Hi, as specified in the PMS spec [1] and stated in #gentoo-portage, RDEPEND will be set to DEPEND, if it is not defined in the ebuild itself. But devmanual [2] and developer handbook [3] both state, you have do

Re: [gentoo-dev] RDEPEND definition in docs differ from official PMS specs

2009-01-17 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:41:25 +0100 Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote: Marius Mauch schrieb: It's strongly recommended to set both explicitly as the behavior could change in future EAPI versions, and to ensure that you actually think about which deps are build deps and which

Re: [gentoo-dev] reorganization of /var/lib gentoo-related files

2008-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 10:55:39 +0100 Fabio Rossi ross...@inwind.it wrote: On Wednesday 31 December 2008, Marius Mauch wrote: Any reason for that? Aesthetics aren't a very compelling argument IMO, and the FHS also seems to favor the current layout (in my interpretation at least, as we're

Re: [gentoo-dev] reorganization of /var/lib gentoo-related files

2008-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:00:35 +0100 Fabio Rossi ross...@inwind.it wrote: On Wednesday 31 December 2008, Marius Mauch wrote: The same could be said about /var/lib/init.d, /var/lib/dhcp, /var/lib/iptables or several other packages that aren't hosted by Gentoo. In the other direction

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: reorganization of /var/lib gentoo-related files

2008-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:15:54 +0100 Fabio Rossi ross...@inwind.it wrote: On Wednesday 31 December 2008, Jeremy Olexa wrote: Fabio Rossi wrote: On Wednesday 31 December 2008, Duncan wrote: Except that... in theory, some or all of those apps could technically be used on/for other

Re: [gentoo-dev] reorganization of /var/lib gentoo-related files

2008-12-30 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:12:23 +0100 Fabio Rossi ross...@inwind.it 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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

2008-12-29 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 09:37:24 +0530 Nirbheek Chauhan nirbheek.chau...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote: Zac Medico wrote: Nevermind, apparently GLEP 31 already requires ASCII anyway: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0031.html

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: add a compiler-version entry to pkg db

2008-12-09 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 9 Dec 2008 11:21:24 -0800 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01:44 Tue 09 Dec , Federico Ferri wrote: today I hit this annoyance, because my laptop hung in the middle of an 'emerge -e @world' (checking that my world set compiles with gcc-4.3... stopped at ~ 300 of 700

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: equery refactorization

2008-12-06 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 12:44:25 +0900 Douglas Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also thought about renaming the list(l) option as search, because if you look at the help output, almost every module lists something. equery's list is actually a search, I don't see why we shouldn't name it that. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Moving HOMEPAGE out of ebuilds for the future

2008-12-02 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 02:05:31 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: metadata.xml already contains data that eix and other software should be able to search in (like longdescriptions), and having each package in kde-base report http://www.kde.org/ as its homepage is kinda

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: debug/release builds extensions/clarification proposal

2008-12-02 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 08:19:18 +0100 Maciej Mrozowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, and I'm afraid I cannot provide any single evidence that users actually need features like: - per package cflags/ldflags/features - per category use flags, accept_keywords, cflags - or tag clouds instead of hard

Re: [gentoo-dev] debug/release builds extensions/clarification proposal

2008-12-01 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 11:39:35 +0300 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This leads me to different conclusion. I was thinking about new portage feature: emerge --info pkg . So to make portage show not only global information but per-package either. In many cases this will simplify analyzing

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Saving package emerge output (einfo, elog, ewarn, etc.) somewhere official

2008-12-01 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:35:32 -0700 Joe Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My intention with the RFC was to see if the concept has any worth and to kick it around a bit. I do not really see this as a deficiency in Gentoo's technology (which I have a feeling is how many here have interpreted

[gentoo-dev] Time to say goodbye

2008-11-30 Thread Marius Mauch
So, time has come for me to realize that my time with Gentoo is over. I haven't actually been doing much Gentoo work over the last months due to personal reasons (nothing Gentoo related), and I don't see that situation changing in the near future. In fact I've already reassigned or dropped most of

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Saving package emerge output (einfo, elog, ewarn, etc.) somewhere official

2008-11-30 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 09:25:51 -0700 Joe Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bottom line here is that there is extremely valuable and critical info in our emerge output. In a way, these messages are like Gentoo-specific READMEs (or release notes and/or install instructions). However, it is not

[gentoo-portage-dev] Time to say goodbye

2008-11-30 Thread Marius Mauch
So, time has come for me to realize that my time with Gentoo is over. I haven't actually been doing much Gentoo work over the last months due to personal reasons (nothing Gentoo related), and I don't see that situation changing in the near future. In fact I've already reassigned or dropped most of

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] search functionality in emerge

2008-11-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 07:17:40 -0500 Emma Strubell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, I've started looking at the code, and I must admit I'm pretty overwhelmed! I don't know where to start. I was wondering if anyone on here could give me a quick overview of how the search function currently

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] search functionality in emerge

2008-11-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 21:01:40 -0800 (PST) devsk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: not relying on custom system daemonsrunning in the background. Why is a portage daemon such a bad thing? Or hard to do? I would very much like a daemon running on my system which I can configure to sync the portage

Re: [gentoo-dev] Please review: function epunt_la_files for eutils.eclass

2008-11-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:35:44 +0100 Gilles Dartiguelongue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Le mercredi 12 novembre 2008 à 18:16 +0100, Peter Alfredsen a écrit : [snip] Mart had already proposed a static-lib USE flag. Donnie just suggested on IRC we turn this use flag into a FEATURES flag.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [RFC] portage-2.1.6 release plans

2008-11-07 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:38:48 -0800 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since portage-2.2 isn't quite ready yet due to ongoing work in package sets and preserve-libs, and I don't want ongoing work to hold back other features that are stable, I'm planning to split a 2.1.6 branch from trunk.

Re: [gentoo-dev] kerberos USE flag

2008-10-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:52:59 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone remind me again why we have the kerberos USE flag enabled by default? AFAIK it was added so that the default profile provides support for joining a Windows domain (same for the ldap flag). If no one opposes, I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] some global useflags

2008-10-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 00:19:27 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:47:06 -0700 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 05:43:38PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Utterly illegal, needs to die. Why? I don't agree that it needs to

Re: USE=multislot, xDEPEND-syntax in SLOT and Slot dependencies [Was: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] some global useflags]

2008-10-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 17:20:32 -0700 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ignoring Vapier's tirade against ciaranm there, we need the xDEPEND-syntax for SLOTS as the real solution, however that still wouldn't resolve the portion that has CTARGET as part of the SLOT, since metadata

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stabilize ebuilds which use EAPIs only supported by ~arch PMs

2008-10-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:59:39 +0200 Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 05:38:34PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: On 02:03 Tue 14 Oct , Jose Luis Rivero wrote: There are some others sceneries but are not so common as the one presented could be. Any

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New keywords for non-Gentoo Linux platforms

2008-10-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:48:19 +0200 Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whatever. Some of you seem to have some quite agressive dislikement to it. In the end it's just a name/tag. I guess I could live with anything, including c3p0. Well, while I dislike x64 I'm more concerned about

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New keywords for non-Gentoo Linux platforms

2008-10-09 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 20:11:01 +0200 Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: amd64-linux x64-openbsd x64-solaris Is there a special reason why you're using x64 instead of amd64 in those cases? (IMO x64 is the most stupid name for the x86_64 architecture) Marius

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New keywords for non-Gentoo Linux platforms

2008-10-09 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:16:10 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:05:00 +0200: On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 20:11:01 +0200 Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: amd64-linux x64

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=set for meta-packages that should behave like package sets (revised)

2008-10-04 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 03:46:41 + Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would also be important to have versioned sets (depending on a slot, for example). Marius Mauch (genone) suggested a very interesting way to solve this by using a set config file (portage specific

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2

2008-09-25 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 17:24:57 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - another idea that hasn't been mentioned yet is that we could simply inject @system into world_sets in the portage ebuild when we detect a 2.1-2.2 upgrade (the ebuild already does a few other migrations that way

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2

2008-09-09 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:43:45 +0100 Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: Second for the suggestions on how to handle the transition: - treating 'world' and '@world' differently is a no go from my POV. One of the main reasons to implement them as sets was to remove

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=live (instead of PROPERTIES=live-sources or RESTRICT=live)

2008-09-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:39:58 -0700 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do the name and definition of this PROPERTIES=live value seem good? Would anybody like to discuss any changes to the name, definition, or both? Not sure if 'live' is really the best choice here, as many things also apply

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition)

2008-09-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:01:48 -0700 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do the name and definition of this PROPERTIES=virtual value seem good? Would anybody like to discuss any changes to the name, definition, or both? If it's only used to indicate that the package doesn't install any files

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] PROPERTIES=virtual for meta-packages (clarification of definition)

2008-09-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:20:07 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I therefore believe I like just moving them all to a *virtual*/ category better, thus obviating the need for that particular property in the first place. I strongly belive that it's a horrible idea to add special

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: World file handling changes in Portage-2.2

2008-09-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 22:39:41 +0300 Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As per glep 42 (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0042.html) here is the required email for a new news item. This news item is important because otherwise users will be missing updates to the system set if they

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New RESTRICT=live value for identification of live ebuilds?

2008-08-06 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:02:48 -0700 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, It might good to add support for a new RESTRICT=live value in ebuilds. By specifying this value, an ebuild would be able to indicate that it uses

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [2/4] proto-GLEPS for Tree-signing

2008-07-29 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:51:45 +0100 Mike Auty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sorry, I lost my notes from when I last looked these over several months ago, and only just found them again. I haven't copied this to [EMAIL PROTECTED], so let me

Re: [gentoo-dev] metadata.xml USE flag descriptions

2008-07-28 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 12:50:01 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please make sure you commit any changes to use.local.desc to metadata.xml otherwise you risk the chance of having your changes lost. I'm currently in the process of converting use.local.desc to metadata.xml. After a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] New policy: LDFLAGS should be respected

2008-07-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:45:29 -0500 Jeremy Olexa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: It will at least allow QA team to fix such bugs where patches are already available. So, if bugs are being fixed why is there a need to fix something that isn't broken

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-2.2-rc3 parallel merges quit being parallel

2008-07-26 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 16:56:20 -0500 Andrew Gaffney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Duncan wrote: --jobs=10 --keep-going --load-average=15 For a dual-dual-core setup, a load average of 4.0 is fully loaded. Only in ideal cases, when you have long-running processes hammering the cpu and little or no

Re: [gentoo-dev] system set no longer in part of world set

2008-07-21 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:02:57 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: Now that's a big exaggeration. It _might_ be missing from world updates (there are still many cases where it will be included), but that's not the only available operation in portage. Marius

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: auto-detection of unpack dependencies

2008-07-20 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:41:58 +0400 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: В Чтв, 17/07/2008 в 04:51 +0200, Marius Mauch пишет: At dev.gentoo.org/~genone/unpack.eclass is the draft for an eclass to implement this feature. Marius, although it's possible to do this things in eclass why

Re: [gentoo-dev] system set no longer in part of world set

2008-07-18 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 10:01:28 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Olivier Crête wrote: On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 18:01 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote: This brings out the fun of circular depends. I don't really know how to address this but a lot of packages are going to have to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] system set no longer in part of world set

2008-07-18 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:21:24 +0100 Robert Bridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:30:20 +0200 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IMHO it would be better to teach users to explicitly specify '@system' during updates, e.g. `emerge -uDN @system

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: auto-detection of unpack dependencies

2008-07-17 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:00:32 -0500 Joe Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: The eclass also contains it's own implementation of unpack (renamed to unpack2) and src_unpack so the logic which tools/packages are used for unpacking can be maintained in a single place instead

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: auto-detection of unpack dependencies

2008-07-16 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:14:18 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a result of Cardoes earlier mail we talked a bit about possible solutions in #gento-portage, and I suggested to let portage automatically inject the deps based on SRC_URI pattern matching. A mapping of extensions

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: auto-detection of unpack dependencies

2008-07-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:12:37 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:14:18 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a result of Cardoes earlier mail we talked a bit about possible solutions in #gento-portage, and I suggested to let portage automatically

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: auto-detection of unpack dependencies

2008-07-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:34:33 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:23:26 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right, just I'd expect the parsing of SRC_URI (with conditionals) to be a bit tricky in bash, not something I'm going to work on. An eclass

[gentoo-dev] RFC: auto-detection of unpack dependencies

2008-07-14 Thread Marius Mauch
As a result of Cardoes earlier mail we talked a bit about possible solutions in #gento-portage, and I suggested to let portage automatically inject the deps based on SRC_URI pattern matching. A mapping of extensions and their unpack deps would be kept in the tree (e.g. mapping '.tar.bz2' to '(

Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 10 July 2008

2008-07-13 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 00:11:18 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Betelgeuse@ dberkholz: with GLEP 55 EAPI X can add the support for scm Betelgeuse@ dberkholz: and older Portage versions work just fine I thought we established that EAPI (no matter how it's defined) only controls

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: 0-day bump requests

2008-07-03 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 01:16:09 +0200 Jeroen Roovers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Disclaimer: I'm not really a package maintainer anymore. 1) How do you feel when you receive an early version bump request? I guess like with most people it depends a) If I'm already aware of the new version, or would

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] A seemingly bug found when emerging @preserved-rebuild

2008-07-01 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 02:41:14 +0800 Zhang Le [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this a bug? or did I miss something here? Thanks for your time! The 'bug' here is that USE=multislot shouldn't exist. People using it should be able to deal with resulting breakages on their own Marius --

Re: [gentoo-dev] When the version scheme changes

2008-06-29 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:52:37 +0200 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote: On Saturday 28 June 2008 17:03:13 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: PV=${PV/0./} to that new ebuild. This is the cleanest way to do

Re: [gentoo-dev] When the version scheme changes

2008-06-29 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:20:06 +0200 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:52:37 +0200 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1

[gentoo-dev] License groups

2008-06-26 Thread Marius Mauch
While portage-2.2 has support for license visibility filtering (aka ACCEPT_LICENSE) this currently isn't very usable as we still don't have the necessary default license group and ACCEPT_LICENSE setting in the tree (and even the only existing license group is of questionable use, see bug #228527).

Re: [gentoo-dev] A few questions to our nominees

2008-06-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:38:18 +0200 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment, Please point them so I could fix them properly ^^ For example all the ordering issues pointed out by others in this thread. Also the whole

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: A few questions to our nominees

2008-06-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:32:22 + Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Portage 2.2 and others support sets, portage 2.2 even supports dynamic sets like the @preserved-rebuild. Shouldn't be that hard to add a live-ebuilds dynamic set. (Comments on the feasibility of my idea from portage

Re: [gentoo-dev] A few questions to our nominees

2008-06-13 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:05:01 +0200 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Piotr Jaroszyński wrote: Hello, looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I have a few technical questions for you: 1. GLEP54 Just for fun I took some of the ideas about alternative

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI-2 - Let's get it started

2008-06-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:11:32 +0200 Bo Ørsted Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 10 June 2008 18:26:55 Doug Goldstein wrote: Let's try to aim to do an EAPI=2 sometime soonish since Portage now has USE flag depends in version 2.2 which is looming on the horizon. It'd be nice to hit

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage persistence structures :: information about ports tree

2008-06-09 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:36:14 -0300 João Macaíba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: May someone give me some help on this ? How does portage do the searchs ? Walk into the ports tree and build some structure or store this info on some embedded database like berkeley db or sqlite ? You're probably

Re: [gentoo-dev] merging two packages - upgrade path?

2008-06-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:44:06 +0200 Ulrich Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Matthias Schwarzott wrote: With #1 the user will get a message about the blockers immediately. With #2 his emerge (maybe of many packages) will needlessly die when it reaches your package.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP56] USE flag descriptions in metadata

2008-06-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:42:24 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All, Here's a GLEP for the addition of USE flag descriptions to package metadata. It does not address any future ideas that others may have had or suggested. It merely gives developers the necessary tools to

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP56] USE flag descriptions in metadata

2008-06-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 17:01:00 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 15:42:24 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All, Here's a GLEP for the addition of USE flag descriptions to package metadata. It does not address any

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)

2008-05-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 31 May 2008 04:26:39 -0700 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just to jump in quickly; this thread is about adding --as-needed to the default CFLAGS. To get this accomplished you need to: A. Convince the portage developers to put it in make.conf/make.defaults. Wrong. We don't

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)

2008-05-30 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 31 May 2008 00:47:44 +0300 Mart Raudsepp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Portage developers - is there anything we should do to get --as-needed to make.conf.example and other places, beyond fixing the known bugs on the appropriate bug tracker? make.conf.example is no big deal, that's just

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?

2008-05-29 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 29 May 2008 09:28:16 +0100 Mike Auty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: | The purpose of this is to keep the system operational after library | upgrades until all affected packages could be rebuilt and to | simplify

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?

2008-05-29 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 29 May 2008 11:02:55 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As much as we want preserve-libs to be an all-curing magic, it's not. When you need to replace a library you need to do so _for all its users at once_, if you allow

[gentoo-dev] RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?

2008-05-28 Thread Marius Mauch
As portage-2.2 is about to be unmasked into ~arch soon (there is one weird bug to solve before) it's time to ask for some input on one of the important new features, FEATURES=preserve-libs. (if you're already familiar with it you can skip this paragraph) Simply said, when this feature is enabled

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: About herds and their non-existant use

2008-05-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 22 May 2008 08:05:07 +0200 Tiziano Müller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I think the herds concecpt is somewhat useless, I'd rather like to see something like this instead: maintainer teamfoobar/team /maintainer This makes it clear that it is a team instead of a person (where

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: About herds and their non-existant use

2008-05-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 23 May 2008 14:07:41 +0200 Tiziano Müller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Santiago M. Mola wrote: On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Tiziano Müller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: While we're changing things around, perhaps we can then also standardize the

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] About herds and their non-existant use

2008-05-21 Thread Marius Mauch
Moving the discussion to -dev per leios request. On Wed, 21 May 2008 23:42:19 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As this topic jus came up in #-dev, and most people there seemed to agree with me I thought it might be worth to bring this topic up again. The topic is that I think

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Repoman subversion support

2008-05-13 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 12 May 2008 20:01:34 +0200 Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After a short discussion on #-portage, here a feature patch from the prefix branch, diffed to the trunk, irrelevant hunks removed. Antarus once was working on factoring out the vcs bits of repoman into

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving some packages around

2008-05-11 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 12 May 2008 02:58:55 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: - bison and flex should get out of the system package set, what clearer than moving them out of sys-*? system and the sys-* categories don't have much of a relationsship, so that's no argument IMO. Yes

Re: [gentoo-dev] escaping variables in sed expressions

2008-04-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:17:54 +0200 Frank Gruellich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Santiago M. Mola [EMAIL PROTECTED] 15. Apr 08: On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) Currently is use ':' as sed delimiter when paths are involved. I'd also like to hear from you about proper

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] BNF for DEPEND in EAPI0 and EAPI1

2008-04-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:04:41 +0200 Björn Michaelsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I worked through the current PMS and tried to formalize the grammar for DEPEND a little better. Maybe someone could have a look at it and check it for correctness. It could even become part of the gentoo

[gentoo-dev] changes to staffing-needs page and project pages

2008-04-02 Thread Marius Mauch
Since a few weeks ago project pages can contain a new recruitment section to list open positions within the project that require fresh blood (thanks to neysx for implementing this). Historically those were only listed centrally http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/staffing-needs/index.xml, which

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: querying whether pkg is installed with version X or upwards (atom syntax) (re-post)

2008-03-26 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:07:13 +0200 Amit Dor-Shifer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: reposting, hoping for a reply this time. Thanks, Amit Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: emerge features syntax for installing a package according to certain bounds. This is referred to in the manpage as atom specification.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remaining PMS todo list etc

2008-03-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:32:41 -0600 Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: There's an updated, pre-built copy of current PMS at: http://dev.gentoo.org/~spb/pms.pdf Thanks for keeping up with this. * 174335: Some ebuild use FEATURES. Can we get them to stop

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: New build types

2008-03-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:59:01 + Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rémi Cardona wrote: What would be the point of such a change? What problem are you trying to solve or to improve? Secondly efficiency; in the case of a pbuild it could be run from within the PM; for something like a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-qa] splitting up package.mask

2008-03-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 07:45:19 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i dont see it being any different from an ebuild declaring its own KEYWORDS. if you want to be lazy, then have a magic KEYWORD: +pmask. What's wrong with KEYWORDS= ? (I'm not saying it's the perfect solution, just

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-qa] splitting up package.mask

2008-03-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 01:34:24 -0700 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/14/08, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 14 March 2008, Alec Warner wrote: On 3/14/08, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i think the real solution here is allowing masking in a package

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for March

2008-03-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:41:58 +0530 Anant Narayanan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev list to see. If it's not too late for this month's meeting, I'd

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for (next year's probably) SoC

2008-03-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 22:07:37 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: The tasks are minor tasks that don't require a lot of time at hand, but gives a good way to judge if the person is in for the experience or the money, and might be able to cut the deal even for Gentoo devs

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] please explain use of hooks

2008-03-02 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 2 Mar 2008 11:18:39 +0100 Jonas Bernoulli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And if not the handbook this should really go into the portage manpage. bashrc If needed, this file can be used to set up a special environment for ebuilds, different from the standard root environment.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Google SOC 2008

2008-02-28 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:32:45 -0800 joshua jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All, Google is once again doing the summer of code for students. I'm helping organize it this year and am putting out a call for some elements to help. 1) We need idea's for things to do. Diego has already

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword amd64 - x86_64

2008-02-21 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 19:40:23 +0100 Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 20-02-2008 19:23:26 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:59:11 -0500 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please excuse my ignorance if this is a naive comment or has been brought

Re: [gentoo-dev] Keyword amd64 - x86_64

2008-02-20 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:59:11 -0500 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please excuse my ignorance if this is a naive comment or has been brought up before. With all the non amd processors now with 64bit support. amd64 as a keyword seems a bit odd and off maybe. What's the

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: adding support for running eautoconf to base.eclass

2008-02-13 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:44:22 +0200 Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do you think about adding support to base.eclass for running eautoreconf? so instead of src_unpack() { unpack ${A} cd ${A} eautoreconf } would just add EAUTORECONF=yes inherit base

Re: [gentoo-dev] new portage categories

2008-02-07 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:56:43 -0800 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15:12 Wed 06 Feb , Alec Warner wrote: On 2/4/08, Jonas Bernoulli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/4/08, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 20:11 Mon 04 Feb , Jonas Bernoulli wrote: Thinking

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Changes to some profiles

2008-02-02 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 09:50:21 +0100 Rémi Cardona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vlastimil Babka a écrit : How about just some elog If you use make install, emerge --noreplace debianutils in the kernel's postinst or something. Bellow is my contribution to this thread :) Cheers, Rémi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Move SCMs to their own category?

2008-02-01 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 17:57:39 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:52:16 -0500 (EST) Caleb Tennis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems like all source control/revision control programs live in dev-util, but they might be better served in something like dev-scm

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

2008-01-28 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:43:38 +0100 Matthias B. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's wrong with making it an optional dependency? Something like a useflag Because if this would be done consistently we'd end up with several thousand use flags long term, not really what I'd call managable.

Re: [gentoo-dev] How to force homedir on enewuser

2008-01-18 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:46:58 +0100 Hanno Böck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is the correct way to handle this? I'd suggest that enewuser might get some force-parameter that tells it to delete and recreate the user if it already exists. Thoughts? Tell the user to do it manually in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Seeking questions for a user survey

2008-01-16 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:09:20 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008-01-15 15:05 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a): - what feature would you like most to be implemented in portage? (parallel builds, localization, revdep-rebuild integration, overlay

Re: [gentoo-dev] Seeking questions for a user survey

2008-01-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:33:48 -0800 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, so per the one discussion in #-dev this evening, I'm looking for questions to put on a new user survey. For style of questions, multiple choice (both pick-one and pick-many) or simple integers would be best.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Reducing the size of the system package set

2008-01-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:42:57 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: I already ranted about the fact that the dependency tree of our ebuilds is vastly incomplete, as many lack dependency on zlib; trying to get this fixed was impossible, as Donnie and other insisted that as

Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and subproject status

2008-01-10 Thread Marius Mauch
About portage: Current status: The portage project is mostly fine, though we've missed my original plan to release the first 2.2 test versions last year, mostly because of lack of time on my part. I hope we can fix that within the next two or three months. As Paul has already mentioned, the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI) [2]

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:43:10 +0100 Piotr Jaroszyński [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I have updated the GLEP, hopefully it is less confusing now and hence the discussion will be more technical. Still doesn't address my concerns, namely: - silently expands the scope of EAPI beyond ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI inside ebuild filename (.EAPI-ebuild of different?)

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:50:02 +0300 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This hack is just to solve portage problem which does not ignore .ebuild files which does not follow pkg-ver.ebuild syntax and suggested solution is not the only solution. Other possibilities are, which I like more: 1.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI definition Was: [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 23:34:44 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand the ban on non-EAPI-0 features in in-tree profiles, since users could be using old PMs, but it's fine using them in /etc/portage/*, provided one has upgraded to an appropriately compatible PM, correct? Yes

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >