[gentoo-dev] integrating solaris overlay into main portage

2007-10-10 Thread Christian Parpart
to know there's yet another package that can be installed using gentoo's portage on yet another architecture. How do you feel with that idea? Regards, Christian Parpart. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

[gentoo-dev] net-www/apache testing request (marking stable anytime soon)

2005-04-09 Thread Christian Parpart
) on your system(s) and please report any oddies you experience. Thanks in advance, Christian Parpart. [1] http://packages.gentoo.org/ebuilds/?apache-2.0.53 [2] http://packages.gentoo.org/ebuilds/?apache-1.3.33-r2 -- Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 15:57:13 up 50 days, 12:22, 1

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-www/apache testing request (marking stable anytime soon)

2005-04-10 Thread Christian Parpart
for commonapache/apache.conf) from scratch. Regards, Christian Parpart. -- the following rfc contains how to quote on lists like this: Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 17:57:59 up 18 days, 7:04, 0 users, load average: 0.28, 0.31, 0.35 pgprALEbGGY3f.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 36: providing both CVS and Subversion?

2005-04-10 Thread Christian Parpart
. why isn't it a current solution? because SVN isn't right in place or because of the copyright problems still around or ...? thanks, Christian Parpart. -- Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 23:42:51 up 18 days, 12:49, 2 users, load average: 0.44, 0.69, 0.75 pgpftbMY1O8Aq.pgp

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 36: providing both CVS and Subversion?

2005-04-10 Thread Christian Parpart
On Sunday 10 April 2005 8:34 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:27:03 +0200 Christian Parpart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Both have pros and cons. Well, the ASF has everyting converted into a | single repository and they seem to be just lucky with it. KDE is | about to convert

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 36: providing both CVS and Subversion?

2005-04-11 Thread Christian Parpart
On Monday 11 April 2005 8:26 am, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 23:57:12 +0200 Christian Parpart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | SVN uses transactions and | changesets. These make a heck of a lot more sense if they're done on | a per project basis. | | reason? Because you can

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 36: providing both CVS and Subversion?

2005-04-11 Thread Christian Parpart
On Monday 11 April 2005 10:42 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:23:29 +0200 Christian Parpart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Monday 11 April 2005 8:26 am, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 23:57:12 +0200 Christian Parpart | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | wrote

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 36: providing both CVS and Subversion?

2005-04-12 Thread Christian Parpart
to *always* complain) report in *detail*. Finally, just don't use svn if you feel that uncomfortable with it. No one said that cvs will go away. I'm tired of reading your 'svn is hard to merge because it *is* hard to merge' posts :( Sorry, but this is how it comes over. Christian Parpart

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask

2005-04-20 Thread Christian Parpart
. Seriousely, why did we put all our power into those improvements when we're now about to revert mostly everything? Regards, Christian Parpart. -- Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt 09:29:00 up 27 days, 22:35, 0 users, load average: 0.01, 0.05, 0.00 pgpFGxPPtrag7.pgp Description: PGP

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask

2005-04-20 Thread Christian Parpart
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 2:14 pm, Lance Albertson wrote: Christian Parpart wrote: And yeah, I disagree to a move-back, too!! I'm most likely not to support this in any kind, instead, I'd be willing in pushing p.mask'ed apache httpd 2.1 into the tree, so, that I don't have to live

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask

2005-04-20 Thread Christian Parpart
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 10:59 am, Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Wednesday 20 April 2005 09:36, Christian Parpart wrote: And yeah, I disagree to a move-back, too!! I'm most likely not to support this in any kind, instead, I'd be willing in pushing p.mask'ed apache httpd 2.1 into the tree, so

[gentoo-dev] net community servers, in what category?

2005-07-20 Thread Christian Parpart
of commercial software of this subject and just a few few (serious) open sourced ones. So, finally, in what category could those packages be placed in? Thanks in advance, Christian Parpart. -- 23:17:49 up 119 days, 12:25, 0 users, load average: 4.17, 2.57, 3.12 pgpY2xXfkksE9.pgp Description

Re: [gentoo-dev] net community servers, in what category?

2005-07-20 Thread Christian Parpart
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 23:58, Christian Parpart wrote: dev-libs/libyacsutil - the support library (client/server) community-libs/libyacs - the YaCS core framework library (server) community-server/yacsd - the UNIX daemon process finally serving the community app-admin

Re: [gentoo-dev] net community servers, in what category?

2005-07-20 Thread Christian Parpart
to do with www et al. so, net-misc seems best then. [...] You shouldn't create categories for anything less than about 10 to 20 ebuilds. The more the better, really. I understand. So, as Oliview proposed the same like you, I gonna stick with this then. Thanks all, Christian Parpart. -- 00

Re: [gentoo-dev] app-portage/genlop: 9 open bugs, dead upstream

2005-07-24 Thread Christian Parpart
did some more effords on this partiular package. don't flame me now, but I forgot what package exactly it has been, however, the wact still remains. finally, genlop still has a user base (including me). So I wouldn't dare in dropping it. Regards, Christian Parpart. -- 04:32:01 up 123 days

Re: [gentoo-dev] Put DESCRIPTION HOMEPAGE and LICENSE in another place

2005-08-10 Thread Christian Parpart
be the same package; though slotted, and with differend homepage URL. But anyway, I feel that these cases in realworld are really very rare (except the the license-change thingy) just my thoughts, Christian Parpart. -- 05:28:28 up 140 days, 18:36, 0 users, load average: 0.14, 0.18, 0.23

Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild design issue regarding some {I need the lib and api only}-DEPENDs

2005-08-18 Thread Christian Parpart
On Thursday 18 August 2005 19:01, Georgi Georgiev wrote: maillog: 18/08/2005-16:28:40(+0200): Christian Parpart types Using the minimal useflag for this - IMHO - is a misuse of the idea of minimal semantically - as I do understand minimal in a way like don't overbloat me with patches

Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild design issue regarding some {I need the lib and api only}-DEPENDs

2005-08-18 Thread Christian Parpart
enheancement. (IMO) All in all, I think it isn't worth even attempting at this time. read above. do you still think so? If so, why? Regards, Christian Parpart. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=55816 -- 04:43:52 up 148 days, 17:51, 1 user, load average: 0.66, 0.76, 1.15

Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64

2005-09-01 Thread Christian Parpart
do some guy need this, but hey, programmers are really creative, and use what the compiler accepts - I myself ran into this while porting my apps/libs to amd64. And think of it, not everybody has the money to grab one. Congrats, Christian Parpart. pgpKwfrGKm0Ue.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] combining x86 and amd64

2005-09-04 Thread Christian Parpart
On Friday 02 September 2005 06:28, Lance Albertson wrote: Grant Goodyear wrote: Christian Parpart wrote: [Thu Sep 01 2005, 05:45:43PM CDT] This just leads me to assume you're not really a coder (wrt native programming languages like C/C++), are you? *Grin* This sort of condescending

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal

2005-09-17 Thread Christian Parpart
with these as the upstream author is a pretty cool guy and gets back to me :) -mike but having some backup is always the safer way, in case some of us is AFK for some unobvious reasons and a security patch is to be injected. Regards, Christian Parpart pgpUVooVe8STE.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal

2005-09-17 Thread Christian Parpart
necessary? indeed, it at least helps curious c++ devs to browse through some yet unknown c++ libs and he maybe finds something useful. Regards, Christian Parpart. pgpzHaXkO28CW.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal

2005-09-17 Thread Christian Parpart
On Saturday 17 September 2005 14:01, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: On 17/9/2005 13:33:30, Christian Parpart ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Saturday 17 September 2005 11:36, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: On 17/9/2005 0:20:57, Mark Loeser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: C++ herd is a good idea, especially

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal

2005-09-18 Thread Christian Parpart
of that kind. However, we've some more no-herd'ed packages to put into this new potential c++ herd - but these are two different discussions/threads IMHO. Regards, Christian Parpart. pgpmomqy0QfGN.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] C++ herd proposal

2005-09-19 Thread Christian Parpart
On Monday 19 September 2005 15:22, warnera6 wrote: Mark Loeser wrote: Paul de Vrieze wrote: I think that dev-util is a very specific category containing development utilities of some sort. There might be some misclassifications in them, but from a user perspective I don't really care

Re: [gentoo-dev] g++ problem

2007-05-31 Thread Christian Parpart
. Hope these thoughts help, Christian Parpart. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC]: gentoo-politics ML

2007-06-07 Thread Christian Parpart
On Thursday 07 June 2007 09:10:41 Kent Fredric wrote: On 6/7/07, Kumba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyways, thoughts? --Kumba +1 +1 here too possible alternative names: gentoo-soap, gentoo-gossip ( not to be confused with net-im/gossip ) gentoo-soap, lol! signature.asc Description:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Are you guys for real?

2007-06-14 Thread Christian Parpart
On Wednesday 13 June 2007 23:53:51 Markus Ullmann wrote: Some numbers to back Vlastimil up Yep there's still development going on, devs commit ebuilds and stuff. http://cia.vc/stats/project/gentoo Also, as said many times, number of devs participating in flamewars here is pretty low

Re: [gentoo-dev] Are you guys for real?

2007-06-14 Thread Christian Parpart
* of us act like that. regards, Christian Parpart. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.