On Saturday, June 18, 2011 10:55:50 justin wrote:
> + tc-export F77
> + tc-export FC
tc-export F77 FC
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
So here are the last changes. Everything is in pkg_setup now, because of
the dependency problem found by Ciaran.
eclass/fortran-2.eclass | 28 ++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/fortran-2.eclass b/eclass/fortran-2.eclass
index
On 18/06/11 15:08, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:18:28 +0200
> justin wrote:
>> The reason why it would be beneficial to use is the pkg_pretend phase
>> is simply that the checks would run at the beginning of a emerge and
>> it would fail directly instead somewhere in the middle.
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:18:28 +0200
justin wrote:
> The reason why it would be beneficial to use is the pkg_pretend phase
> is simply that the checks would run at the beginning of a emerge and
> it would fail directly instead somewhere in the middle. For a single
> package it won't change much but
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2011, justin wrote:
> On 18/06/11 13:18, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> That approach would still write to the filesystem. With the current
>> text the PM is probably allowed to set the sandbox so that writing
>> is anywhere is denied.
> The reason why it would be beneficial to use
On 18/06/11 13:18, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 17.06.2011 20:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Friday, June 17, 2011 12:25:21 Torsten Veller wrote:
>>> * justin :
Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>>>
>>> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
>>> not write to
On 17.06.2011 20:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday, June 17, 2011 12:25:21 Torsten Veller wrote:
>> * justin :
>>> Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>>
>> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
>> not write to the filesystem".
>>
>> Is it allowed to write
On Friday, June 17, 2011 12:25:21 Torsten Veller wrote:
> * justin :
> > Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>
> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
> not write to the filesystem".
>
> Is it allowed to write to T or not? Can the specs be clearer if it's
> a
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2011, Torsten Veller wrote:
> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend
> must not write to the filesystem".
> Is it allowed to write to T or not? Can the specs be clearer if it's
> allowed?
"Must not write to the filesystem" seems to be very clear to
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 18:25:21 +0200
Torsten Veller wrote:
> * justin :
> > Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>
> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
> not write to the filesystem".
>
> Is it allowed to write to T or not? Can the specs be clearer if it's
* justin :
> Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
not write to the filesystem".
Is it allowed to write to T or not? Can the specs be clearer if it's allowed?
--
Thanks
11 matches
Mail list logo
