# Mounir Lamouri volk...@gentoo.org (18 Sep 2011)
# Masked for removal in 30 days. Use Firefox 4 or higher instead.
www-plugins/weave
# 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
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
# 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
# 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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:
-
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
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
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
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
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
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 ]
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
# 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
# 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
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
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
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
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
56 matches
Mail list logo
