Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: what happened to /etc/init.d/hal{d,daemon,whatever} script ?

Jeremy Olexa wrote: > Andrey Grozin wrote: >> It was discussed (don't have a reference to the thread at >> hand) that it would be useful to have a table which shows which >> functions die by themselves, and which not. >> >> Andrey >> > > I see this asked every X months and never quite figured out

[gentoo-dev] Need to mask non-visible packages in package.mask?

Some time ago (31 Oct 2008) I renamed perl-core/File-Spec-3.2701 to perl-core/File-Spec-3.27.01 by adding the new file and removing the other. I expected portage to do an downgrade. It didn't. I realised it when i got this bug and after joining #-portage I add a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Need to mask non-visible packages in package.mask?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Torsten Veller wrote: > Some time ago (31 Oct 2008) I renamed > perl-core/File-Spec-3.2701 to perl-core/File-Spec-3.27.01 > by adding the new file and removing the other. > > I expected portage to do an downgrade. > > It didn't. > > I realised it w

[gentoo-dev] RSBAC-related packages removal notice

RSBAC has been without a maintainer for some time and Hardened is discontinuing support for RSBAC. As such, the following packages are going into package.mask for eventual removal after January 31st, 2009. sys-apps/rsbac-admin sys-kernel/rsbac-sources Gordon Malm (gengor)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Python expat USE flag

2008-12-28 05:23:12 Jesus Rivero napisał(a): > Hello everyone, > > ~A while ago there was a discussion about the new expat USE flag in > dev-lang/python. The flag was first introduced by Vapier on December 08th. > > ~While having expat USE flag may be of great use for embedded > systems o

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, In response to bug 252748 I've implemented a new 'variable.invalidchar' repoman check that will trigger if an ebuild metadata variable contains any characters that aren't in the ASCII character set (0-127). Is this okay, or does anybody think that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: > Hi, > > In response to bug 252748 I've implemented a new > 'variable.invalidchar' repoman check that will trigger if an ebuild > metadata variable contains any characters that aren't in the ASCII > character set (0-127). Is this ok

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

Zac Medico wrote: >> In response to bug 252748 I've implemented a new >> 'variable.invalidchar' repoman check that will trigger if an ebuild >> metadata variable contains any characters that aren't in the ASCII >> character set (0-127). Is this okay, or does anybody think that we >> should allow UT

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Ben de Groot wrote: > Zac Medico wrote: >> Nevermind, apparently GLEP 31 already requires ASCII anyway: >> >> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0031.html >> > The way I read that GLEP is that in ChangeLog and metadata.xml > we should accept the full range o

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

On Tue, 30 Dec 2008 09:37:24 +0530 "Nirbheek Chauhan" wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Ben de Groot > wrote: > > Zac Medico wrote: > >> Nevermind, apparently GLEP 31 already requires ASCII anyway: > >> > >> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0031.html > >> > > The way I read that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Should unicode be allowed in ebuild metadata variables?

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Marius Mauch wrote: > And none of that is relevant to Zacs original question, which is > covered by the following section of the GLEP: Oops, sorry, misread the question :) -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan