Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-07-11 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 07:24 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote: - 23 only make .config checks (should be non-fatal anyway) I couldn't agree more. This bites us in the ass every single release. People who make .config checks fatal should be forced to maintain mozilla-* for a month... ;] - 4 use

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-07-10 Thread Georgi Georgiev
maillog: 09/07/2006-17:17:59(+0100): John Mylchreest types I've tried to clarify my point fairly well above, but the dependancy is fairly strict by design. What in linux-mod except for my specific example above would continue to work if there were no kernel sources present? (I do of course

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-07-09 Thread John Mylchreest
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 11:13:33AM +, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version. We detect this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux (.config, make files, etc...) This is duplicating the superb efforts of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-20 Thread Georgi Georgiev
maillog: 19/06/2006-16:34:55(-0700): Ryan Tandy types Arek (James Potts) wrote: If they don't actually build against the kernel, couldn't/shouldn't they look at either kernel-headers or the output of `uname -r`? Kernel headers being the virtual/linux-headers dependency that Georgi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-20 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 08:49:41PM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote: Could upstream have handled it better? Yes, most definitely. Did they? No, not yet. We're stuck picking up the pieces. What does upstream have to do with the decision to chmod u+s,go-r /usr/bin/gpg or not? If using a kernel

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-20 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 20 June 2006 20:18, Robin H. Johnson wrote: By handling it better, I mean that the code should at runtime try both interfaces, rather than pick one to compile into the binary. yeah, this differentiates good packages and mediocre packages ;) -mike pgpp6T4cBLu01.pgp Description: PGP

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Georgi Georgiev
maillog: 19/06/2006-11:13:33(+): Alec Warner types Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version. We detect this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux (.config, make files, etc...) This is duplicating the superb efforts of the kernel team and of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Alec Warner
Georgi Georgiev wrote: maillog: 19/06/2006-11:13:33(+): Alec Warner types Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version. We detect this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux (.config, make files, etc...) This is duplicating the superb efforts of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Arek (James Potts)
Alec Warner wrote: Georgi Georgiev wrote: maillog: 19/06/2006-11:13:33(+): Alec Warner types Portage currently exports $KV as the current kernel version. We detect this by attempting to mess around with the things in /usr/src/linux (.config, make files, etc...) This is duplicating the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Ryan Tandy
Arek (James Potts) wrote: If they don't actually build against the kernel, couldn't/shouldn't they look at either kernel-headers or the output of `uname -r`? Kernel headers being the virtual/linux-headers dependency that Georgi mentioned. `uname -r` works, but is annoying because you can't

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pending Removal of $KV

2006-06-19 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 05:00:41PM -0700, infowolfe wrote: Kernel headers being the virtual/linux-headers dependency that Georgi mentioned. `uname -r` works, but is annoying because you can't build for a kernel other than the one you're running. Which only applies to kernel modules, not