El jue, 17-06-2010 a las 06:07 +0200, Jeroen Roovers escribió:
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 07:39:01 -0400
Joseph Jezak jos...@gentoo.org wrote:
Your preferred method is exactly how (as a ppc keyworder) I like to
see these kind of bugs handled. Dropping keywords makes an awful lot
more work for
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:04:42 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
In that case, could you then consider to un-CC from keywording bugs
hppa team is not willing to fix? I think it would help a lot to
clean the tree of old versions that are been kept as it's the inly
keyworded on hppa
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 07:39:01 -0400
Joseph Jezak jos...@gentoo.org wrote:
Your preferred method is exactly how (as a ppc keyworder) I like to
see these kind of bugs handled. Dropping keywords makes an awful lot
more work for us and hurts our users, especially since we're not
always very prompt
El lun, 14-06-2010 a las 04:59 +0200, Jeroen Roovers escribió:
What is the problem? The files in place ask you to file a bug report
instead of fiddling with the files yourselves. I put that in place
because I got (fucking) tired of seeing the after effects of people
fiddling with the arch
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:08:58 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
The problem is that, at least regarding gnome related bugs, there are
a lot of keywords dropped for your arch that could be prevented
use.masking an USE, like, for example, dev-util/anjuta-2.28*, that is
causing us to
El lun, 14-06-2010 a las 11:30 +0200, Jeroen Roovers escribió:
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:08:58 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
The problem is that, at least regarding gnome related bugs, there are
a lot of keywords dropped for your arch that could be prevented
use.masking an USE,
On 06/11/2010 12:27 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
From my point of view, I would prefer to:
1. Mask caps for net-wireless/bluez on affected arches, letting us to
keep bluez keyworded.
2. Open two bug reports as done with current policy: one for keywording
libcap-ng and other to check bluez works
El dom, 13-06-2010 a las 14:16 +0300, Petteri Räty escribió:
On 06/11/2010 12:27 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
From my point of view, I would prefer to:
1. Mask caps for net-wireless/bluez on affected arches, letting us to
keep bluez keyworded.
2. Open two bug reports as done with current
El dom, 13-06-2010 a las 14:43 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió:
El dom, 13-06-2010 a las 14:16 +0300, Petteri Räty escribió:
On 06/11/2010 12:27 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
From my point of view, I would prefer to:
1. Mask caps for net-wireless/bluez on affected arches, letting us to
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:29:19 +0200
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
El dom, 13-06-2010 a las 14:43 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió:
El dom, 13-06-2010 a las 14:16 +0300, Petteri Räty escribió:
On 06/11/2010 12:27 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
From my point of view, I would prefer to:
Hello
Let my explain the problem and my suggestion to handle it better (at
least from my point of view) with an example:
Sometime ago I bumped bluez version from 4.39-r2 to 4.60, with that
bump, a new and *optional* RDEPEND on sys-libs/libcap-ng was added.
Since libcap-ng was not keyworded in
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org said:
Hello
Let my explain the problem and my suggestion to handle it better (at
least from my point of view) with an example:
Sometime ago I bumped bluez version from 4.39-r2 to 4.60, with that
bump, a new and *optional* RDEPEND on sys-libs/libcap-ng was
Hello
Let my explain the problem and my suggestion to handle it better (at
least from my point of view) with an example:
Sometime ago I bumped bluez version from 4.39-r2 to 4.60, with that
bump, a new and *optional* RDEPEND on sys-libs/libcap-ng was added.
Since libcap-ng was not
13 matches
Mail list logo
