[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: confcache

2005-11-14 Thread Thomas Kirchner
* On Nov 14 19:43, Brian Harring (gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org) wrote: > Feedback/testing desired, so have fun with it. So far it's working like a charm here; thanks for this! I've been waiting for another confcache implementation. Tom pgpZ3B8dQ3JqG.pgp Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-portage-dev] confcache

2005-11-14 Thread Brian Harring
Hola all. Wrote another confcache implementation (this time not bound to ebd thank god), and stuck an ebuild and portage patch for it in http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/confcache/ . Should be a bit stricter then the 2.1 implementation; for those not aware of what it is, it's a global autoconf

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Plugin framework

2005-11-14 Thread Patrick Börjesson
On 05/11/14 09:53, Brian Harring wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 10:38:28PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:57, Brian Harring wrote: > > > >   filenames. > OT, but return of the funky 'A's... > Curious if others are seeing it, or if my nano/mutt setup just plain > su

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] cache subsystem replacement

2005-11-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 01:13:58AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > Was talking with a guy yesterday who mentioned he had 10 line patch that sped > up current portage a lot with regard to updating metadata. I asked him to > send it to me and here it is: > > --- -??2005-10-29 18:49:15.156173000 +

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] cache subsystem replacement

2005-11-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
Was talking with a guy yesterday who mentioned he had 10 line patch that sped up current portage a lot with regard to updating metadata. I asked him to send it to me and here it is: --- -   2005-10-29 18:49:15.156173000 +0900 +++ /usr/lib/portage/pym/portage_db_cpickle.py  2005-10-08 11:13:37.00

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Plugin framework

2005-11-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 10:38:28PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:57, Brian Harring wrote: > > > ?? filenames. OT, but return of the funky 'A's... Curious if others are seeing it, or if my nano/mutt setup just plain sucks. > > > * portage.py edits to the config class t

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] going to need a 2.0.53-rc8

2005-11-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 04:32:35PM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: > > On Monday 14 November 2005 00:46, Jason Stubbs wrote: > Replace 2.1.0 with 2.2.0 and I'll agree. Skipping 2.1 accomplishes what? People asking, "whoah there, it's a later version then 2.1, where's the 2.1 functionality?" will still

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] going to need a 2.0.53-rc8

2005-11-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Tuesday 15 November 2005 00:32, Marius Mauch wrote: > On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 00:24:02 +0900 > > Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Monday 14 November 2005 00:46, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:52, Brian Harring wrote: > > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 09:19:55AM +

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] going to need a 2.0.53-rc8

2005-11-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 00:24:02 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 14 November 2005 00:46, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:52, Brian Harring wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 09:19:55AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 04:00

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] going to need a 2.0.53-rc8

2005-11-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 12:24:02AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Monday 14 November 2005 00:46, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:52, Brian Harring wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 09:19:55AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 04:00, Brian Harrin

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] going to need a 2.0.53-rc8

2005-11-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Monday 14 November 2005 00:46, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:52, Brian Harring wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2005 at 09:19:55AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Sunday 13 November 2005 04:00, Brian Harring wrote: > > > > *cough* that's that funky _p1 you're using there? :)

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Plugin framework

2005-11-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Monday 14 November 2005 23:17, Marius Mauch wrote: > On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:38:28 +0900 > > Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The cache and elog plugin selection(s) come from user settings but > > emaint (and repoman whenever that happens (and possibly even emerge > > itself one day?))

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Plugin framework

2005-11-14 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:38:28 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The cache and elog plugin selection(s) come from user settings but > emaint (and repoman whenever that happens (and possibly even emerge > itself one day?)) needs to automatically detect what's available and > use it. Th

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Plugin framework

2005-11-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Sunday 13 November 2005 11:57, Brian Harring wrote: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 11:33:06PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > I've had a go at creating a generic plugin framework for portage. The > > attached patch contains: > > > > * plugins/__init__.py that does plugin searching and loading. > > * p