On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 15:09 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 21:55:29 +0200
Santiago M. Mola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution order
of phases. It seems the change was introduced in portage-2.1.5 and it
makes that, when
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:24 -0700
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that everything these days is an EAPI scope change. That's
not very useful for Gentoo, considering it's been quite some time
since PMS was proposed and we've not seen approval for either EAPI=0
or EAPI=1
On Thursday 19 June 2008 02:21:24 Chris Gianelloni wrote:
It seems that everything these days is an EAPI scope change.
Everything change that has the potential to break existing packages, or to
make new packages incompatible with existing package managers, is an EAPI
scope change. That is the
On Freitag, 13. Juni 2008, Santiago M. Mola wrote:
Hi all,
As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution order
of phases. It seems the change was introduced in portage-2.1.5 and it
makes that, when upgrading a package, pkg_postinst is run after the
old version has been
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Matthias Schwarzott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Freitag, 13. Juni 2008, Santiago M. Mola wrote:
Hi all,
As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution order
of phases. It seems the change was introduced in portage-2.1.5 and it
makes that,
Hi all,
As discussed in bug #222721, portage has changed the execution order
of phases. It seems the change was introduced in portage-2.1.5 and it
makes that, when upgrading a package, pkg_postinst is run after the
old version has been removed. This breaks packages which use
has_version in
