-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stratos Psomadakis wrote:
> i'm a bit confused...
> i have the same problem...
> i try to make an upgrade and it says that pidgin is going to be rebuilt
> without the msn use flag(althoug i have enabled the use flag for
> pidgin,in /etc/portage/package
i'm a bit confused...
i have the same problem...
i try to make an upgrade and it says that pidgin is going to be rebuilt
without the msn use flag(althoug i have enabled the use flag for
pidgin,in /etc/portage/package.use)...
what's the problem?...is there a solution?...
:/
thx...
O/H Christian Faul
Dawid Węgliński wrote:
That's why we do have ... --changelog switch to let users
know about changes.
Which is of no use when (as in this case) there is no associated version
bump.
j.
(also, when every new version is a new slot - kernels and webapps)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Dnia 23-07-2007, pon o godzinie 13:38 +0200, Christian Faulhammer
napisał(a):
> "Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Would it be possible to have all the protocols for net-im/pidgin
> > turned on by default. We often get people coming to #pidgin looking
> > for help as to why they can't get M
"Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Would it be possible to have all the protocols for net-im/pidgin
> turned on by default. We often get people coming to #pidgin looking
> for help as to why they can't get MSN or some other protocol working.
> It most often is because they haven't enabled the g
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 22:57 +0100, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-20-07 at 14:40 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > Anyway, if nobody objects and nobody beats me to it, I'll add the USE
> > flags for the common protocols to package.use in the profiles. Now, the
> > real question is what shoul
On Fri, 2007-20-07 at 14:40 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Anyway, if nobody objects and nobody beats me to it, I'll add the USE
> flags for the common protocols to package.use in the profiles. Now, the
> real question is what should I enable?
All of the ones that have no major dependencies are
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 00:02 -0400, Eric Polino wrote:
> > Someone mentioned just killing the USE flags and making them all hard
> > dependencies, however. I really hope that's not done if additional
> > dependencies are involved.
>
> I see your point, but how different would this be to any applic
On 7/20/07, Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:20:06 -0400
"Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would seem there is a good support for a change to enable all
> protocols by default. What will change this issue from a good thread
> to an action on the package
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:20:06 -0400
"Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would seem there is a good support for a change to enable all
> protocols by default. What will change this issue from a good thread
> to an action on the package to implement these ideas?
File a bug on bugs.gentoo.
It would seem there is a good support for a change to enable all
protocols by default. What will change this issue from a good thread
to an action on the package to implement these ideas?
Another suggestion brought to me by an upstream dev was that Pidgin is
configured to install all protocols b
fire-eyes wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
> > OTOH, if enabling those protocols pulls in all sorts of additional
> > packages to support them, shipping with everything on just because
> > it's possible is not the Gentoo way. That's what USE flags are
> > for. If indeed additional dependencies are pulled
Duncan wrote:
> joshua jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> excerpted below, on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:10:35 -0700:
>
>> Honestly..this is not something to get picky over jakub. Upstream was
>> nice and actually came and politely asked us to change the defaults to
>> what most peo
On 7/20/07, Andrew Gaffney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Eric Polino wrote:
> If this is truly a problem, then I think the negative USE flags might
> be the better solution then. This would allow users the ability to
> disable potential insecure features. But really, I doubt security is
> an issu
Eric Polino wrote:
If this is truly a problem, then I think the negative USE flags might
be the better solution then. This would allow users the ability to
disable potential insecure features. But really, I doubt security is
an issue here.
The negative (or no*) USE flags are generally consid
"Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:02:56 -0400:
> On 7/19/07, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
>> below, on Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:52:16 -0400:
>>
>> > Yes t
On 7/19/07, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:52:16 -0400:
>> OTOH, if enabling those protocols pulls in all sorts of additional
>> packages to support them, shipping with everything on just beca
"Eric Polino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:52:16 -0400:
>> OTOH, if enabling those protocols pulls in all sorts of additional
>> packages to support them, shipping with everything on just because it's
>> possible is not the Gentoo way. Tha
On Thursday 19 July 2007, Duncan wrote:
> OTOH, if enabling those protocols pulls in all sorts of additional
> packages to support them, shipping with everything on just because it's
> possible is not the Gentoo way. That's what USE flags are for.
USE flags are not for controlling dependencies, t
On 7/19/07, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
joshua jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:10:35 -0700:
> Honestly..this is not something to get picky over jakub. Upstream was
> nice and actually came and politely asked us to change the de
joshua jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:10:35 -0700:
> Honestly..this is not something to get picky over jakub. Upstream was
> nice and actually came and politely asked us to change the defaults to
> what most people would consider sane
21 matches
Mail list logo
