[gentoo-dev] Re: mtime preservation

2009-11-24 Thread Duncan
Brian Harring posted on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:19:00 -0800 as excerpted: Alternatively, we could simply make portage spawn the mv binary whenever rename fails (it fails when the source and destination are on different devices). Although it's relatively slow, it should solve the problem.

[gentoo-dev] QA last rites for app-forensics/airt

2009-11-24 Thread Diego E . Pettenò
# Diego E. Pettenò flamee...@gentoo.org (24 Nov 2009) # on behalf of QA team # # Fails to build, bug #227571 open since June 2008. # # Removal on 2010-01-23 app-forensics/airt

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla testers wanted - Email send to: no one issue

2009-11-24 Thread Jeremy Olexa
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:09:23 -0500, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tuesday 03 November 2009 13:33:55 Christian Ruppert wrote: Dear gentoo-dev subscriber, as some of you might have been noticed, we're having some trouble with Bugzilla's mail notification. In some cases you might

Re: [gentoo-dev] mtime preservation

2009-11-24 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:19:00 -0800 Brian Harring ferri...@gmail.com wrote: Someone mind explaining to me why we're making mtime preservation so nasty? Having to enumerate every pathway that requires mtime preservation is pretty arduous for the ebuild dev, meaning it's unlikely they'll get