On 04/06/16 21:17, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> We've still got 5.x stable, but that's because there's a security bug
> for PHP every 20 days and it takes 30 days to stabilize an ebuild.
>
> Here's a status report:
>
> * We've got the "eselect php..." stuff sorted out already so you can
>
On 06/04/2016 04:03 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>>
> LOL - that still happens?!
>
Yeah, at least in the U.S. There was a "PHP 6", but everything went so
wrong that they decided to just pretend that the number 6 doesn't exist.
> I still see php5 installed as stable everywhere .. so perhaps php7
On 04/06/16 20:59, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 03:50 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> What's the migration path/timeline look like .. I'da thought it would be
>> months/years to move everything that's centred on php5 up to php7 if
>> that's the way things are going. What happened to php6
Kristian Fiskerstrand schrieb:
Personally I'da thought an ewarning would be sufficient based on the old
flag, and perhaps a news item if considered important enough?!
as long as it is sufficient time and it notifies ahead of time, and the
new use flag can be added to package.use immediately,
On 06/04/2016 03:50 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> What's the migration path/timeline look like .. I'da thought it would be
> months/years to move everything that's centred on php5 up to php7 if
> that's the way things are going. What happened to php6 ?!?
v5 and v7 are mostly compatible, and the few
On 06/04/2016 09:53 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 03:45 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>>
>> would a REQUIRED_USE in newer versions make sense to force the new use
>> flag for people upgrading as a deprecation period?
>>
>
> You mean like requiring USE=webp (new) if the user has
On 06/04/2016 09:50 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 04/06/16 20:45, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>> would a REQUIRED_USE in newer versions make sense to force the new use
>> flag for people upgrading as a deprecation period?
>>
> What's the migration path/timeline look like .. I'da thought it would
On 06/04/2016 03:45 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>
> would a REQUIRED_USE in newer versions make sense to force the new use
> flag for people upgrading as a deprecation period?
>
You mean like requiring USE=webp (new) if the user has USE=vpx (old)?
Sounds like a good idea. It's been totally
On 04/06/16 20:45, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> would a REQUIRED_USE in newer versions make sense to force the new use
> flag for people upgrading as a deprecation period?
>
What's the migration path/timeline look like .. I'da thought it would be
months/years to move everything that's centred on
On 06/04/2016 09:45 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 09:39 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> On 06/04/2016 03:30 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>>> The existing use description might be considered slightly confusing,
>>> potentially ..
>>>
>>
>> I changed them to,
>>
>> Enable webp
On 06/04/2016 09:39 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 03:30 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> The existing use description might be considered slightly confusing,
>> potentially ..
>>
>
> I changed them to,
>
> Enable webp support for GD in php-5.x
> Enable webp support for GD in php-7.x
On 04/06/16 20:39, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 03:30 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> The existing use description might be considered slightly confusing,
>> potentially ..
>>
> I changed them to,
>
> Enable webp support for GD in php-5.x
> Enable webp support for GD in php-7.x
>
>
Ok
On 06/04/2016 03:30 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> The existing use description might be considered slightly confusing,
> potentially ..
>
I changed them to,
Enable webp support for GD in php-5.x
Enable webp support for GD in php-7.x
On 04/06/16 18:14, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/04/2016 12:29 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
>> dev-lang/php:vpx - Enable webp suppoprt for GD
>>
>> ?!?!?!?! Is that a typo?
>>
> Half and half. The "suppoprt" is obviously a typo, but unfortunately,
> PHP uses a bundled copy of GD, so that
On 06/04/2016 12:29 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
>
> dev-lang/php:vpx - Enable webp suppoprt for GD
>
> ?!?!?!?! Is that a typo?
>
Half and half. The "suppoprt" is obviously a typo, but unfortunately,
PHP uses a bundled copy of GD, so that isn't.
...and there's more. In php-7.x, they've
On 06/04/2016 09:29 AM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 12:45:15PM +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguy???n wrote
>> Suggested description: Add support for the WebP image format
>> Currently in use by the following packages:
>
> Out of sheer curiousity...
>
> grep -i -w
On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 12:45:15PM +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguy???n wrote
> Suggested description: Add support for the WebP image format
> Currently in use by the following packages:
Out of sheer curiousity...
grep -i -w webp /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc
...returns the same list
+2
I don't know how many packages that is but it's WAY over the minimum of 5
advised in the dev handbook
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 3:55 AM, Davide Pesavento wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
> wrote:
> > Suggested
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
wrote:
> Suggested description: Add support for the WebP image format
> Currently in use by the following packages:
>
> app-text/tesseract:webp - Enable support for webp image format.
> dev-games/aseprite:webp -
Suggested description: Add support for the WebP image format
Currently in use by the following packages:
app-text/tesseract:webp - Enable support for webp image format.
dev-games/aseprite:webp - Enable webp image format support
dev-libs/DirectFB:webp - build WebP image provider
dev-libs/efl:webp
20 matches
Mail list logo