Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:29:40 +1000 "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote: > On 09/08/17 04:20, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200 > > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > >> - You might be applying local patches through /etc/portage/patches

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On 09/08/17 04:20, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200 > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> - You might be applying local patches through /etc/portage/patches >> that are distributed to all clients > > This might be the strongest reason. Though would

Re: [gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs

Quoting Daniel Campbell (2017-08-07 22:38:53) > On 08/06/2017 02:27 AM, tom...@gentoo.org wrote: > > Quoting Daniel Campbell (2017-07-31 04:16:30) > >> On 07/19/2017 02:33 AM, Amy Liffey wrote: ... > >> > > Ok, as I have done some quite Forth programming in the past, let me step in. > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-boot/plymouth needs major fixes/maintainer

On 17-08-04 17:17:05, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > On K, 2017-07-26 at 11:56 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > sys-boot/plymouth is orphan for a long time. Its old 0.8.x versions > > where having > > important bugs that were fixed in 0.9.x, but 0.9 is also plenty of > > issues. Then, > > either this is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On 09/08/17 10:43, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:29:40 +1000 > "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote: > >> On 09/08/17 04:20, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: >>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200 >>> Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: - You might

[gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

Hello, The following packages are up for grabs: x11-wm/afterstep mail-client/nmh dev-util/wsta dev-util/bats app-admin/yadm Best regards, Amy Liffey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On 08/08/2017 08:10 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: >> I'm not sure explicitly about environment files, but it's an option to >> emerge. For instance, I've added this to my EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to >> ensure none of the following are built: >> >> --buildpkg-exclude "virtual/* sys-kernel/*-sources

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 08/08/2017 07:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > Can you think of any? I cannot see any operator wanting a binary of > > a binary, or a package of sources. When they already have a > > sources > > -

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

> > On 08/08/2017 07:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > >> it can already be controlled through env files. > > > I was thinking it might, but having used them to skip other > > > hooks. I was thinking they could not be used as such for binary > > > packages. Have you confirmed such is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Perl 5.26 Unmasking Warning [affects all users]

On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 04:20:18 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote: > We're finally at a point where we're nearing the unmasking[1] of Perl > 5.26 and making it visible to ~arch users, and a "news item" on this > matter will appear shortly. > > Due to a collection of various problems faced in this version, >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:34:00 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > I'm not sure explicitly about environment files, but it's an option to > emerge. For instance, I've added this to my EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to > ensure none of the following are built: > > --buildpkg-exclude "virtual/*

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 20:15:07 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 08/08/2017 08:10 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > >> I'm not sure explicitly about environment files, but it's an > >> option to emerge. For instance, I've added this to my > >> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to ensure

[gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates. It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a binary package. Packages like -bin packages or gentoo-sources, which are just sources. Having binary ebuilds of those is of no benefit. I can be the opposite causing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On wto, 2017-08-08 at 10:18 -0700, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand > wrote: > > On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > > I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates. > > > It does not make

[gentoo-dev] Last Rites: Several obsolete, broken dev-php/PEAR-* packages

# Brian Evans

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > As most things I think this would require support in PMS, or next EAPI > at minimum. But I think the EAPI comes from PMS, so they are related. > Actually, I'm not sure about this since it doesn't really affect

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: >> I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates. >> It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a binary package. > > Any

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:11:18 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > > I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite > > updates. It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a > > binary package. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On 08/08/17 01:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:11:18 +0200 > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > >> it can already be controlled through env files. > > I was thinking it might, but having used them to skip other hooks. I > was thinking they could not be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates. > It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a binary package. Any particular reason this decision shouldn't be left to the operator of the binhost rather than

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:18:36 -0700 Rich Freeman wrote: > > Whether it belongs in the ebuild, or in metadata, is another matter. The how, implementation, etc is not as important to me. I just think there should be some means to prevent such. If there is not currently. As

Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation

On 08/08/2017 07:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > Can you think of any? I cannot see any operator wanting a binary of a > binary, or a package of sources. When they already have a sources - The machine you're installing it on might not have internet access so you want to have the files

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] flag-o-matic.eclass: Strip LDFLAGS unsupported by the C compiler, #621274

On sob, 2017-07-01 at 18:22 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Include LDFLAGS in the variables stripped by strip-unsupported-flags. > The code reuses the current functions for testing CC, and so only remove > LDFLAGS that are rejected by the C compiler and not the linker. This > solves the case of bug

Re: [gentoo-dev] Perl 5.26 Unmasking Warning [affects all users]

Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 20:55:41 CEST schrieb Andrew Savchenko: > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 04:20:18 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote: > > We're finally at a point where we're nearing the unmasking[1] of Perl > > 5.26 and making it visible to ~arch users, and a "news item" on this > > matter will appear

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] toolchain-glibc.eclass: fix libm.so symlinking for live glibc

The failure happens when live glibc- ebuild is installed: * QA Notice: Missing gen_usr_ldscript for libm-2.26.90.so * ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-::gentoo failed: * add those ldscripts The problem here is how upstream glibc version is detected: dosym ../../$(get_libdir)/libm-${PV}.so

[gentoo-dev] Perl 5.26 Unmasking Warning [affects all users]

We're finally at a point where we're nearing the unmasking[1] of Perl 5.26 and making it visible to ~arch users, and a "news item" on this matter will appear shortly. Due to a collection of various problems faced in this version, extensive amounts of work has been needed to simply deliver an