Jakub Moc wrote:
> Donnie, pingy! ;) Just a friendly reminder to run the script again, so
> that we can do a last attempt on fixing the remaining stuff before
> resorting to more drastic solutions...
Yeah, it's on my list, but I've got family here all weekend so no time
to work on stuff.
Thanks,
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Jakub Moc wrote:
>> Olivier Crete wrote:
>>> Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a
>>> last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask
>>> the packages that no one cares enough about to port them.
>> Hmmm, not a up2date
Jakub Moc wrote:
> Olivier Crete wrote:
>> Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a
>> last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask
>> the packages that no one cares enough about to port them.
>
> Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK... There's a tra
Olivier Crete wrote:
> Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a
> last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask
> the packages that no one cares enough about to port them.
Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK... There's a tracker bug
http://bugs.gent
On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 05:26 +0930, Raymond Lewis Rebbeck wrote:
> > Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a
> > last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask
> > the packages that no one cares enough about to port them.
>
> games-roguelike/slas
On Thursday, 8 June 2006 5:15, Olivier Crete wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-07-06 at 18:41 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> > Arek (James Potts) wrote:
> > > Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > >>> >=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for
> > >>>
> > >>> modular X.
> > >>
> > >> I couldn't agre
On Wed, 2006-07-06 at 18:41 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Arek (James Potts) wrote:
> > Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> >>> >=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for
> >>> modular X.
>
> >> I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow
> >> unported ebuilds
Arek (James Potts) wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>> >=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for
>>> modular X.
>> I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow
>> unported ebuilds to break.
> Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a great idea to
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote:
=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for
modular X.
I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow
unported ebuilds to break.
Thanks,
Donnie
Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a gre
Jakub Moc wrote:
>> =virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for
> modular X.
I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow
unported ebuilds to break.
Thanks,
Donnie
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
@4u wrote:
> After posting and closing the bug report:
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135870
> Jakub Moc noticed that the current >=virtual/x11-7.0 ebuild misses its
> task and creates trouble.
Indeed. To re-iterate here, I'll basically re-paste what I've said on
the bug, so that people
11 matches
Mail list logo
