[gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-plugins/weave

2011-09-17 Thread Mounir Lamouri
# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (18 Sep 2011) # Masked for removal in 30 days. Use Firefox 4 or higher instead. www-plugins/weave

[gentoo-dev] Last rites for net-misc/asterisk-chan_unicall, media-libs/libsupertone, net-libs/libmfcr2 and net-libs/libunicall

2009-09-21 Thread Mounir Lamouri
# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (20 Sep 2009) # media-libs/libsupertone fails with =media-libs/spandsp-0.0.5, bug 273995 # net-misc/asterisk-chan_unicall needs media-libs/libsupertone # net-libs/libmfcr2 needs libsupertone and only needed by asterisk-chan_unicall # net-libs/libunicall is only

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for net-misc/asterisk-chan_bluetooth

2009-09-21 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Christian Bricart wrote: Mounir Lamouri schrieb: # Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (30 Jul 2009) # Masked for removal in 60 days. # Upstream's unactive since 2005. Do not support asterisk versions in tree. # bug 279383 net-misc/asterisk-chan_bluetoot may be replaced by (unpackaged

[gentoo-dev] Last rites for net-misc/asterisk-app_rtxfax

2009-09-21 Thread Mounir Lamouri
# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (21 Sep 2009) # net-misc/asterisk-app_rtxfax fails with =media-libs/spandsp-0.0.3, bug 180318 # Masked for removal in 30 days. net-misc/asterisk-app_rtxfax

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-09-05 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Zac Medico wrote: Sebastian Pipping wrote: I propose support for license groups in ebuilds then, I guess. That seems like a reasonable solution. So, an ebuild can do something like LICENSE=@GPL-2+ and that will expand to whatever the definition of the GPL-2+ license group happens to

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-09-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Rémi Cardona wrote: Le 01/09/2009 00:12, Mounir Lamouri a écrit : Hi, As you should know, GLEP 23 [1] introduced USE flags conditions in LICENSE variable and || operator in addition of licenses groups and ACCEPT_LICENSE variable. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0023.html /me

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-09-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Sebastian Pipping wrote: Mounir Lamouri wrote: It's even worst when we try to use ACCEPT_LICENSE to have a free operating system. Let's suppose 'free' in fsf free and osf free, LGPL-2.1 is free for both but LGPL-2 isn't and we can suppose, most LGPL-2 licensed packages in the tree

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-09-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Duncan wrote: Sebastian Pipping posted on Tue, 01 Sep 2009 04:21:49 +0200 as excerpted: However I do notice that GPL-2+ could make things easier. Why not introduce a license group for it like @GPL-2+ or so, instead? That would be transparent and use existing means. I've always

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-09-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Rémi Cardona wrote: Le 03/09/2009 23:10, Mounir Lamouri a écrit : Duncan wrote: Sebastian Pipping posted on Tue, 01 Sep 2009 04:21:49 +0200 as excerpted: However I do notice that GPL-2+ could make things easier. Why not introduce a license group for it like @GPL-2+ or so, instead

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] USE flags requirements (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-08-31 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: There's also bug 251179[1], which is ugly at first glance, but shows that we don't really need an extra variable to control dependencies between USE-flags (it *is* after all a dependency). So, we can either use use1? ( =${CATEGORY}/${PVR}[use2,use3,use4] ) which

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] USE flags requirements (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-08-31 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Is the less expressive solution you're describing still useful enough to make it worthwhile? When we were doing this for Exherbo, we identified five types of inter-use-flag dependency: Actually, I said in my email I was looking for opinions about the feature not

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] USE flags requirements (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-08-31 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:15:37 +0200 Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org wrote: * at least one of a b c, possibly only if d IUSE_REQUIREMENTS=d? ( || ( a b c ) ) Moderately eww... * exactly one of a b c, possibly only if d

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] USE flags requirements (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-08-31 Thread Mounir Lamouri
dev-ran...@mail.ru wrote: On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 07:27:32PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Then when the user turns on all three: * If 'd' is enabled, if 'a' is enabled, 'b' must not be enabled * If 'd' is enabled, if 'a' is enabled, 'c' must not be enabled * If 'd' is

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-08-31 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, As you should know, GLEP 23 [1] introduced USE flags conditions in LICENSE variable and || operator in addition of licenses groups and ACCEPT_LICENSE variable. [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0023.html I want to show an issue in ACCEPT_LICENSE that have to be fixed with a new

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] USE flags requirements (EAPI-4 ?)

2009-08-30 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, While writing and using some ebuilds, I had to deal with (pseudo) USE flags requirements. For example, if you install mplayer with USE=encode the result will depend on other USE flags: if you have USE=encode mp3, it will install lame for example. I know a few ebuilds behave like that in the

[gentoo-dev] Post-GSoC project document

2009-08-23 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, My Google Summer of Code project was about writing a portage backend for PackageKit. Before beginning the work we knew it will not be easy. So I tried to write the backend as much complete as possible and I did a few changes to portage to help that. But this work helped me to see all the

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

2009-08-22 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Samuli Suominen wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:01:47 +0300 Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote: media-libs/jpeg-7 installs .so.7.0.0 so this causes some headacke for binary applications: Doesn't this mean you should slot it? No. I only

[gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_PROPERTIES in portage trunk

2009-08-11 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, I would like to inform you in addition of ACCEPT_KEYWORDS and somewhat new ACCEPT_LICENSE, portage now uses ACCEPT_PROPERTIES. As for LICENSE, this var let the user mask some packages considering the PROPERTIES line. Contrary to ACCEPT_LICENSE, the default value is *. This means every

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit

2009-08-11 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Mounir Lamouri wrote: So, this week, I will add a ACCEPT_PROPERTIES feature to portage. I was thinking of filtering interactive PROPERTIES in my backend but zac told me he was planning to add this feature. It should be available soon (one or two days) and the gnome-packagekit ebuild

[gentoo-dev] Last rites for net-misc/asterisk-chan_bluetooth

2009-07-30 Thread Mounir Lamouri
# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (30 Jul 2009) # Masked for removal in 60 days. # Upstream's unactive since 2005. Do not support asterisk versions in tree. # bug 279383 net-misc/asterisk-chan_bluetooth

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit

2009-07-30 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: Am Montag, 15. Juni 2009 22:51:52 schrieb Mounir Lamouri: I'm working on a portage backend for PackageKit. Could you give us a small status update? Does your backend already work? Best wishes, Arn Hi, It has been a while without weekly updates

Re: [gentoo-dev] [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit

2009-07-05 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 5:05 AM, Steve Dommettst...@st4vs.net wrote: I'm no Python programmer, and I haven't even read the code involved, but in the interests of minimising duplication of effort, I thought you'd be interested to know that Sabayon, a Gentoo based

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage API questions

2009-06-29 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, My 2 cents: Sebastian Pipping wrote: - installed packages with version numbers vardb = portage.db[portage.settings[ROOT]][vartree].dbapi vardb.cpv_all() will return cat/package-version vardb.cp_all() will return cat/package of installed packages - entries for

[gentoo-dev] [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit (2)

2009-06-25 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, Here I come again with another gsoc update. Nearly weekly (10 days) but still better than nothing ;) Last time, I was talking about an ebuild for packagekit soon. Actually, packagekit is not useful without a pretty frontend. I am using gnome-packagekit but packagekit and gnome-packagekit

[gentoo-dev] [gsoc-status] portage backend for PackageKit

2009-06-15 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, I'm working on a portage backend for PackageKit [1]. As I did not really present my project, you have to know PackageKit is an universal (distribution-wide) package manager. To do so, every package manager which wants to work with PackageKit have to follow an api. PackageKit is compatible

Re: [gentoo-dev] packages up for grabs

2009-06-14 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Raúl Porcel wrote: Since i don't have too much time nor motivation to fix packages(i prefer doing arch work), i'm asking someone to take the following packages, i'm dumping them to net-p2p atm, but its just Betelgeuse and me, so feel free to maintain them. net-p2p/deluge net-p2p/qbittorrent

Re: [gentoo-dev] New metadata fields

2009-06-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Jeremy Olexa wrote: On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Steve Dibb bean...@gentoo.org wrote: I had an idea for some new fields to go in metadata.xml. Not sure if we would need a GLEP for this or not? Anyway, what do you guys think: Two things I can think of adding that would be useful: -

Re: [gentoo-dev] New global USE flags (network, 3dnowext, static-libs, mtp)

2009-06-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Samuli Suominen wrote: Mart Raudsepp wrote: On K, 2009-06-03 at 02:13 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: USE network is used by 9 ebuilds, and one is using USE networking which can be converted, that'd be 10. USE network Enable networking support Maybe network and net could be

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE default value (GLEP 23)

2009-06-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:22 AM, Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org wrote: Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Most licenses aren't for usage, but for distribution -- surely you mean EULAs? License and EULA is the same for most users and it's exactly the same

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

2009-06-03 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Mike Frysinger wrote: This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council 2009/2010 - Nominations are now open

2009-06-02 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: Hello fellow developers and users. Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2009/2010 are now open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 14/06/2009). I would like to nominate: darkside scarabeus tanderson Mounir

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE default value (GLEP 23)

2009-06-02 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org wrote: This feature (ACCEPT_LICENSE) is important to remove check_license() call from ebuilds which need user input while merging. Interaction in ebuild should be avoided and it is a blocker

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] netbeans-6.7-rc1 (only reporting)

2009-06-02 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, You should file a bug to bugs.gentoo.org instead of posting your bug report to a mailing list. In addition, gentoo-portage-dev is only about portage development. Thanks, Mounir Zhu Sha Zang wrote: Problems in installation. arch: i386 netbeans flags: [ebuild U ]

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

2009-06-01 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Mike Frysinger wrote: This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE default value (GLEP 23)

2009-06-01 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Fri, 29 May 2009 19:17:03 +0200 Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org wrote: Most of GLEP 23 features have already been implemented in portage. Some since a long time (at least in stable portage) like multiple licenses and conditional licenses. License group

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE default value (GLEP 23)

2009-06-01 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 23:01:04 +0200 Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org wrote: The main show-stopper for this last time it came up was all those X packages using their package name as a licence. Have you thought of how to get that glaring QA issue addressed

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE default value (GLEP 23)

2009-05-30 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Richard Freeman wrote: Mounir Lamouri wrote: It looks like some licenses need acceptance. I prefer the wording: some software vendors claim that their licenses must be accepted to use the software. I'm not aware of any law which requires a license to use software - at least not inside

[gentoo-dev] RFC: ACCEPT_LICENSE default value (GLEP 23)

2009-05-29 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, In the context of my GSOC [1] I need to get GLEP 23 [2] fully implemented and this means get ACCEPT_LICENSE used with a default value and bug 152593 [3] fixed. = GLEP 23 summary = Most of GLEP 23 features have already been implemented in portage. Some since a long time (at least in stable

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Mounir Lamouri
William Hubbs wrote: [snip] My question for the group is, how do you feel about speech software being on our minimal cd as well as our live cd? I agree, it should be in our minimal and live CD's. There is no reason to consider blind persons out of the minimal CD. Mounir

[gentoo-dev] DESCRIPTION size

2009-05-17 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, According to devmanunal [1], DESCRIPTION should be 80 characters max but according to repoman, DESCRIPTION should be 100 characters max. I'm confused, who should I believe ? :) [1] http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/variables/index.html Thanks, Mounir

Re: [gentoo-dev] DESCRIPTION size

2009-05-17 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Ulrich Mueller wrote: The devmanual also says Where possible, try to keep lines no wider than 80 positions. which would limit DESCRIPTION to 66 characters. These are guidelines, not strict rules. Keep it shorter if it's reasonably possible. Even guidelines should be consistent. If

Re: [gentoo-dev] license issue with fretsonfire

2009-05-17 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Arun Raghavan wrote: On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 18:17 +0200, Mounir Lamouri wrote: [...] I think the code can be considered GPL-2 (i will check if there is no header specifying something else) and for the fonts, I will have to add 2 licenses not in the tree at the moment. But what to do

Re: [gentoo-dev] Passing arguments to eqmake3

2009-05-13 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Nikos Chantziaras wrote: I have a package that uses qmake (from Qt 3) as its build system and that installs into /usr/local by default (as any well packaged software should do). This of course can be overridden at build time. In this case, with: qmake PREFIX=/usr projectfile.pro In

Re: [gentoo-dev] New global USE flag: gsm

2009-05-09 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Mounir Lamouri wrote: Description : Adds support for the gsm lossy speech compression codec Alternative description : Adds support for the gsm lossy speech compression codec (via media-sound/gsm) This use flag is used by: media-libs/gst-plugins-bad media-libs/mediastreamer media-plugins

Re: [gentoo-dev] license issue with fretsonfire

2009-05-09 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Arun Raghavan wrote: The fonts license seems to be the same as licenses/BitstreamVera which is in-tree. One of them, yes. But the two others fonts license are more difficult to get. As for the songs, does it make sense to put that in a separate package that the code package depends on? The

Re: [gentoo-dev] Retiring

2009-05-05 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Markos Chandras wrote: On Tuesday 05 May 2009 19:26:23 Sergio D. Rodríguez Inclan wrote: Could be a good idea publish a status of each Gentoo project and see what is needed, so the users/devs can offer some help. [snip] Some one could say Post it on gentoo.org homepage. I wonder if

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Training points for users interested in helping out with ebuild development

2009-05-04 Thread Mounir Lamouri
George Prowse wrote: I think you are missing the point. If you sit and wait for them to join you will always be understaffed. Go on a big dev drive! Announce it all over all the Gentoo's normal communication channels and other generic linux places! Email some linux magazines, talk to

[gentoo-dev] license issue with fretsonfire

2009-05-02 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, I was going to put frets on fire into the tree when I realized the license of this game [1] is not very easy to get. The source code is GPL-2 (with this note some source files derived from other sources might have differing licenses.), 3 fonts files have specific licenses and the songs follow

[gentoo-dev] New global USE flag: gsm

2009-04-29 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Description : Adds support for the gsm lossy speech compression codec Alternative description : Adds support for the gsm lossy speech compression codec (via media-sound/gsm) This use flag is used by: media-libs/gst-plugins-bad media-libs/mediastreamer media-plugins/gst-plugins-farsight

Re: [gentoo-dev] New global USE flag: gsm

2009-04-29 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Mounir Lamouri wrote: [snip] net-misc/xsupplicant net-wireless/wpa_supplicant [snip] The 2 last ones are using gsm use flag to enable an authentication algorithm. Will the mobile herd agree to change the 'gsm' USE flag of wpa_supplicant and xsupplicant from 'gsm' to 'gsm-auth' or 'eap

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-im/tapiocad, net-im/tapioca-xmpp, net-im/tapiocaui

2009-04-22 Thread Mounir Lamouri
# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (22 Apr 2009) # Masked for removal in 60 days. See bug 248008. # Tapioca is unmaintained and they are officially abandoned subprojects. # In addition, tapioca-xmpp has been superseeded by telepathy-gabble. net-im/tapiocad net-im/tapioca-xmpp net-im/tapiocaui

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-libs/zapata

2009-04-08 Thread Mounir Lamouri
# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (08 Apr 2009) # This lib is not used by any package and it doesn't work on amd64 # Upstream doesn't maintain this package anymore # See bug 180757. Masked for removal in 30 days net-libs/zapata

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 3's default src_install needs bikeshedding

2009-03-30 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Daniel Pielmeier wrote: Ciaran McCreesh schrieb am 30.03.2009 18:43: On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:33:48 +0200 Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote: else for x in AUTHORS ChangeLog NEWS README; do if [ -e ${x} ]; then Is -e really better than -s? I think -s

Re: [gentoo-dev] please stop using foo-${PV}-bar.patch in other ebuild versions than ${PV}

2009-03-22 Thread Mounir Lamouri
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org 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 patch with a proper name? And multiply number and total size of files

Re: [gentoo-dev] Should that file be a License ?

2009-02-23 Thread Mounir Lamouri
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) hk...@gentoo.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mounir Lamouri wrote: Hi, I was writing a trivial version bump for net-voip/gnugk-2.2.8 (bug #258518) but upstream added a file named p2pnat_license.txt (see

[gentoo-dev] Should that file be a License ?

2009-02-21 Thread Mounir Lamouri
Hi, I was writing a trivial version bump for net-voip/gnugk-2.2.8 (bug #258518) but upstream added a file named p2pnat_license.txt (see http://dpaste.com/123376/) This file looks to authorize gnugk project (and users) to use p2pnat technology. gnugk is already licensed under GPL-2 and I was