[gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

hasufell posted on Mon, 22 Jul 2013 02:50:04 +0200 as excerpted: [Where to reply? This seems the best spot in general. Subthread is discussing permanent in-tree p.mask vs. overlay. The below points were supposed to be the pros of the overlay choice.] > On 07/22/2013 01:49 AM, Diego Elio Pett

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:26:25 +0200 hasufell wrote: > Afaiu pmasks are rather meant for > a) new, very hot versions of libraries/tools that can break your > system in more than one part > b) security masks, temporary masks and other masks we expect to remove > in the future You can just summarize

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On 22/07/2013 01:50, hasufell wrote: > It does not apply, because we still support it officially in our main > tree as a distribution, no matter if it's p.masked or not. No we don't. P.masked software is *explicitly* not supported. > Anyway... if people disagree, then it doesn't make much sense t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 07/22/2013 02:34 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > 2. Overlay package.* (accept one version of one package from a > particular overlay, mask all packages in an overlay that aren't > explicitly unmasked, don't apply package.(un)mask from one overlay > t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > We're starting to drift off topic here, but I've always felt that this > is something that could be improved on. I'm not saying that any of > this should just be thrown together, but some of the following might > be useful: > > 1. Overlay de

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On 07/22/2013 01:49 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > On 21/07/2013 23:38, hasufell wrote: - consistency of tree quality >> does not apply to p.mask'd packages > > p.mask says that the package is in _bad_ quality, explicitly, and you > can say how, so "does not apply" are not really the words I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2013-07-22, o godz. 00:16:31 > hasufell napisał(a): >> - users have to run "layman -a foo" ...I hope they will manage (and the >> masking reason will be updated to explain where to look for googleearth >> ebuilds) > > Then to get *a sing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On 21/07/2013 23:38, hasufell wrote: >>> - consistency of tree quality > does not apply to p.mask'd packages p.mask says that the package is in _bad_ quality, explicitly, and you can say how, so "does not apply" are not really the words I'd use. >>> - less user confusion (the checksum failures al

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On 07/22/2013 01:20 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > On 07/22/2013 01:03 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: >> On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 00:35 +0200, hasufell wrote: >>> On 07/22/2013 12:33 AM, Michał Górny wrote: I'd either use a >>> separate single-purpose overlay or add it to science-overlay. > > >> If it's a sepa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 07/22/2013 01:03 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 00:35 +0200, hasufell wrote: >> On 07/22/2013 12:33 AM, Michał Górny wrote: I'd either use a >> separate single-purpose overlay or add it to science-overlay. > > > If it's a separa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 00:35 +0200, hasufell wrote: > On 07/22/2013 12:33 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Dnia 2013-07-22, o godz. 00:16:31 hasufell > > napisał(a): > > > >> On 07/22/2013 12:07 AM, Duncan wrote: > >>> hasufell posted on Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:22:24 +0200 as > >>> excerpted: > >>> >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On 07/22/2013 12:22 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:16 PM, hasufell wrote: > >> pros: >> - consistency of tree quality does not apply to p.mask'd packages >> - less user confusion (the checksum failures alone get us a lot of bugs >> every release without people realizi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/22/2013 12:33 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2013-07-22, o godz. 00:16:31 hasufell > napisał(a): > >> On 07/22/2013 12:07 AM, Duncan wrote: >>> hasufell posted on Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:22:24 +0200 as >>> excerpted: >>> solution: Treeclean i

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

Dnia 2013-07-22, o godz. 00:16:31 hasufell napisał(a): > On 07/22/2013 12:07 AM, Duncan wrote: > > hasufell posted on Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:22:24 +0200 as excerpted: > > > >> solution: Treeclean it and maintain it in an overlay (maybe > >> science-overlay). That's exactly what overlays are for...

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:16 PM, hasufell wrote: > pros: > - consistency of tree quality > - less user confusion (the checksum failures alone get us a lot of bugs > every release without people realizing what it means...) and people > expect packages to work in the tree > - less bugs no one can

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

On 07/22/2013 12:07 AM, Duncan wrote: > hasufell posted on Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:22:24 +0200 as excerpted: > >> solution: Treeclean it and maintain it in an overlay (maybe >> science-overlay). That's exactly what overlays are for... experimental >> stuff. > > What's the pros/cons of overlay vs. in-

[gentoo-dev] Re: remove sci-geosciences/googleearth from the tree

hasufell posted on Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:22:24 +0200 as excerpted: > solution: Treeclean it and maintain it in an overlay (maybe > science-overlay). That's exactly what overlays are for... experimental > stuff. What's the pros/cons of overlay vs. in-tree-but-masked for something like this? In-tre

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove eclass/ChangeLog

On Wed, 23 May 2012 11:02:58 +0300 Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 05/23/2012 05:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > > One person doesn't do entries. OMG let's remove it! > absolutely because inconsitency renderess the file useless Perfect is the enemy of good enough. Stuck in a cabin for the weekend with

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove eclass/ChangeLog

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/23/2012 05:46 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On Wed, 23 May 2012 12:29:34 -0400 Rich Freeman > wrote: > >> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Samuli Suominen >> wrote: >>> On 05/23/2012 05:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: One person doesn't do entries

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove eclass/ChangeLog

On Wed, 23 May 2012 12:29:34 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Samuli Suominen > wrote: > > On 05/23/2012 05:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: > >> One person doesn't do entries.  OMG let's remove it! > >> > > > > absolutely because inconsitency renderess the file useless > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove eclass/ChangeLog

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 05/23/2012 05:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: >> One person doesn't do entries.  OMG let's remove it! >> > > absolutely because inconsitency renderess the file useless > Well, for now the solution is to enforce following policy. For the future

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove eclass/ChangeLog

On 05/23/2012 05:36 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:33:11 +0300 Samuli Suominen wrote: ChangeLog entries missing for every autotools.eclass modification today. On 05/20/2012 03:31 PM, Mike Frysinger (vapier) wrote: vapier 12/05/20 12:31:33 One person doesn't do entries. O

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove eclass/ChangeLog (was: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in eclass: autotools.eclass)

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:33:11 +0300 Samuli Suominen wrote: > ChangeLog entries missing for every autotools.eclass modification today. > > On 05/20/2012 03:31 PM, Mike Frysinger (vapier) wrote: > > vapier 12/05/20 12:31:33 One person doesn't do entries. OMG let's remove it! -- fonts, gcc

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove package from system set in custom profile

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Canek Peláez Valdés posted on Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:26:22 -0600 as > excerpted: > >> Hi; I'm trying to make a custom profile, and I need to remove a package >> from the system set. Is there a way I can do this without editing >>

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove package from system set in custom profile

Canek Peláez Valdés posted on Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:26:22 -0600 as excerpted: > Hi; I'm trying to make a custom profile, and I need to remove a package > from the system set. Is there a way I can do this without editing > /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages? > > Sorry if this is the wrong place for

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove package from system set in custom profile

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > Hi; I'm trying to make a custom profile, and I need to remove a > package from the system set. Is there a way I can do this without > editing /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages? I see now that I can copy the whole /usr/portage/profile

[gentoo-dev] Re: REMOVE

Stelios Boulios posted on Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:51:41 +0300 as excerpted: [blank, see subject] See the headers for any post forwarded by this list. They all contain the following information: List-Post: List-Help: List-

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

* Ryan Hill : > Torsten Veller wrote: > > * Torsten Veller : > > > Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in > > > profiles/profiles.desc? > > > > Based on the current feedback I'll change it not earlier than friday > > next week if nobody objects. > > Did you get feedback from

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:30:32 +0100 Torsten Veller wrote: > * Torsten Veller : > > Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in > > profiles/profiles.desc? > > Based on the current feedback I'll change it not earlier than friday > next week if nobody objects. Did you get feedback

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 05:24:25PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: > Every machine type profile has a developer, desktop and server sub profile. > > How about deleting those? If you are capable of setting up a Gentoo/MIPS > setup, then you are certainly capable of setting up few profile defaults > o

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

On 02/25/2010 05:14 PM, Mark Loeser wrote: > Torsten Veller said: >> * Torsten Veller : >>> Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in >>> profiles/profiles.desc? >> >> Based on the current feedback I'll change it not earlier than friday >> next week if nobody objects. > > That w

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

Torsten Veller said: > * Torsten Veller : > > Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in > > profiles/profiles.desc? > > Based on the current feedback I'll change it not earlier than friday > next week if nobody objects. That would be nice. I'd also love to know why we need abo

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

* Torsten Veller : > Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in > profiles/profiles.desc? Based on the current feedback I'll change it not earlier than friday next week if nobody objects. -- Thanks

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:12:44PM +0100, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > Hi, > > Jeremy Olexa : > > I would guess that it would be far easier to work in an overlay at > > this point. I would also guess that if there are ANY mips users out > > there that they would have to use some other ACCEPT_KEYW

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

Hi, Jeremy Olexa : > I would guess that it would be far easier to work in an overlay at > this point. I would also guess that if there are ANY mips users out > there that they would have to use some other ACCEPT_KEYWORDS value > because the shape of ~mips is so...bad. Don't remove an architectur

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove "dev"-status of mips profiles

Hi, Torsten Veller : > Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in > profiles/profiles.desc? Agreement here. Maybe a restart on non-obsolete MIPS hardware (read Loongson instead of SGI) would be great. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project http://www.gentoo.o

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove global USE flag tetex

Andrey Grozin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > > there should be no more packages in the tree that have USE=tetex, so > > this global USE flag can be removed. Any opinions? > Great. > > The following packages still depend on virtual/tetex: Which is no sh

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove my address

David Shakaryan wrote: > George Prowse wrote: > >> Mike Frysinger wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday 25 October 2006 01:53, Drake Wyrm wrote: >>> I think someone is yanking your chain, vapier. >>> i doubt it ... other people on irc mentioned receiving said e-mail as >>> we

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove my address

George Prowse wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: >> On Wednesday 25 October 2006 01:53, Drake Wyrm wrote: >>> I think someone is yanking your chain, vapier. >> >> i doubt it ... other people on irc mentioned receiving said e-mail as >> well >> > > Haven't seen said email here... From my understanding

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove my address

Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wednesday 25 October 2006 01:53, Drake Wyrm wrote: I think someone is yanking your chain, vapier. i doubt it ... other people on irc mentioned receiving said e-mail as well Haven't seen said email here... George -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove my address

Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > stop spamming this shit and go read the mailing list page like i said > already: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml -mike I think someone is yanking your chain, vapier. You're replying to a message that I didn't see on the list. Also, while this rep

[gentoo-dev] Re: remove my address

stop spamming this shit and go read the mailing list page like i said already: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml -mike pgpfLyWPE49l3.pgp Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] Re: remove my address

read the goddamn mailing list page for how to unsubscribe *yourself* -mike pgpPKfrfwYOZb.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove your modular X unmask

Duncan wrote: Is it worth posting bugs on these yet? Gentoo or upstream? Any tracker bug to point me at? (I have the binpkgs so can remerge them for additional testing with little trouble, if necessary.) Yes, and they are most likely upstream bugs. Two things to do before posting a bug: 1)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Remove your modular X unmask

On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 07:05 -0700, Duncan wrote: > * Overlay was doing strange thing. In this case it was SDL overlay as > used by dosbox -- I tried rebuilding both libsdl and dosbox, but the > overlay still failed. Maybe related to the ABI change? SDL is being dumb with alpha visuals here. Need

[gentoo-dev] Re: Remove your modular X unmask

Donnie Berkholz posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:08:54 -0700: > This is a reminder to everybody that now modular X is in ~arch, you need > to REMOVE YOUR MODULAR X UNMASK. > > We're getting lots of issues because people aren't doing this and are > getting packa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove

Mike Frysinger wrote: we know it's retarded, but not everyone is a ninja ... no reason to rant about it /me drags from the pile of dead conversations But it's easy to become a Ninja, all you need is a simple t-shirt: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/philbooth/How_To_Be_A_Ninja.jpg --Kumba --

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove

On Wednesday 10 August 2005 04:15 pm, Duncan wrote: > Eric Clapprood posted > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > excerpted below, on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:53:25 -0400: > > > xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" > > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40";> > > Wow! Perfect demonstration of the t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove

On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 13:15 -0700, Duncan wrote: > Wow! [snip] Next time please ask yourself - is this e-mail really necessary? ./Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: remove....IN TEXT ONLY FORMAT

Hey Duncan, Thanks for taking the time to provide me with your paragraph of wisdom. What's a mail Header? jk -Original Message- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Duncan Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 4:15 PM To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-de

[gentoo-dev] Re: remove

Eric Clapprood posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Wed, 10 Aug 2005 11:53:25 -0400: > xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40";> Wow! Perfect demonstration of the technical literacy both of those that post "remove" instructions to m