[gentoo-dev] Re: Moving some packages around

2008-05-18 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
Ulrich Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 A Lexical Analyser and a Parser Generator are also required by
 IEEE Std 1003.1 (aka POSIX) as part of the C-Language Development
 Utilities.

 So it doesn't make much sense to remove flex and bison from system.

IIRC POSIX mandates vi too, and we don't have that in system.

-- 
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/


pgpUtWRYxFly8.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Re: Moving some packages around

2008-05-18 Thread Ulrich Mueller
 On Sun, 18 May 2008, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:

 A Lexical Analyser and a Parser Generator are also required by
 IEEE Std 1003.1 (aka POSIX) as part of the C-Language Development
 Utilities.

 IIRC POSIX mandates vi too, and we don't have that in system.

No, it's optional (User Portability Utilities option, POSIX2_UPE).
ed is required by POSIX, though. ;-)

Ulrich
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list



Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Moving some packages around

2008-05-17 Thread Ulrich Mueller
 On Mon, 12 May 2008, Ryan Hill wrote:

 [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-*? They are not so commonly
 used so there should no compelling reason to have them installed on
 every system;

 both are required to build our toolchain.

A Lexical Analyser and a Parser Generator are also required by
IEEE Std 1003.1 (aka POSIX) as part of the C-Language Development
Utilities.

So it doesn't make much sense to remove flex and bison from system.

Ulrich
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list



[gentoo-dev] Re: Moving some packages around

2008-05-11 Thread Ryan Hill
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-*? They are not so commonly used
 so there should no compelling reason to have them installed on every
 system;

both are required to build our toolchain.

 - gdb is not part of the system, this might be a problem for
   crossdev...;

it's part of the sourceware tree.  i think it should stay in sys.

 sys-devel/patch - app-text/patch

:(

 sys-devel/gettext - app-i18n/gettext (well, it's part of system for
 G/FBSD, but I'd rather have deps expressed properly...)

:(  (ok, less so than the one above)

 sys-devel/distcc - dev-util/distcc
 sys-devel/icecream - dev-util/icecream

sys-cluster?



 Yes these are a lot of moves, sincerely I think sys-* categories are a
 bit bloated as they are, and I suppose we should start moving the
 things around rather than waiting forever ad ever..

I guess I don't see the point.  If you do move them, don't forget about
documentation changes.


-- 
fonts, gcc-porting,   by design, by neglect
mips, treecleaner,for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Re: Moving some packages around

2008-05-11 Thread Ryan Hill
On Sun, 11 May 2008 19:46:36 -0600
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I guess I don't see the point.  If you do move them, don't forget
 about documentation changes.

Also consider that people searching for bugs about dev-util/ccache for
example won't find many results.

-- 
fonts, gcc-porting,   by design, by neglect
mips, treecleaner,for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature