On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 07:46:24PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 08/29/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> > That and the fact the 2.1 state should be decided, if we're going to
> > have (effectively) two branches of development going at once, vs
> > developmental line and maintenance branch.
>
> Well,
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:47:51PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Tuesday 30 August 2005 15:28, Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > On 08/30/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> > > Problem is that you then rely on python always evaluating
> > > "so
On Wednesday 31 August 2005 02:46, Marius Mauch wrote:
> However recently I met at least one nasty bug in the 2.1 dep resolver
> which (if I understood right) Jason classified as more or less
> unfixable, so I'm not that sure how viable 2.1 is anymore.
This same bug is in stable as well. The diffe
On 08/29/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> Somebody care to split a masking patch for stable rather then the
> emerge modifications I did btw? I'm poking at ensuring an eapi=0
> portage's generated eapi=1 cache entries are not used by an eapi=1
> portage without a forced regeneration atm.
Well, the
On 08/30/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> > What's the point of using > anyway?
> Simplicity in the code right now, since stable will *never* support
> anything but eapi0. It's an easy check.
You really want to tell me that you consider
if myeapi > 0:
as simpler than
EAPI_COMPATIBLE="0"
if m
On Tuesday 30 August 2005 15:28, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > On 08/30/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> > Problem is that you then rely on python always evaluating
> > "somestring" > 0 as True which I don't think is a good idea (it holds
> > tru
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 08/30/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> Problem is that you then rely on python always evaluating "somestring" >
> 0 as True which I don't think is a good idea (it holds true even for "0"
> > 0), if you treat 0 as a string you get problems
On 08/30/05 Brian Harring wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:38:16PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > On 08/30/05 Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> >
> > > On Monday 29 August 2005 22:52, Zac Medico wrote:
> > > > Brian Harring wrote:
> > > > > Please test this out; if you want to test the EAPI checking,
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:38:16PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On 08/30/05 Paul de Vrieze wrote:
>
> > On Monday 29 August 2005 22:52, Zac Medico wrote:
> > > Brian Harring wrote:
> > > > Please test this out; if you want to test the EAPI checking, tag
> > > > EAPI=1 into an ebuild, and try maki
On 08/30/05 Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Monday 29 August 2005 22:52, Zac Medico wrote:
> > Brian Harring wrote:
> > > Please test this out; if you want to test the EAPI checking, tag
> > > EAPI=1 into an ebuild, and try making emerge bail.
> >
> > Well, it bails too often. :)
> >
> > It seems that
On Monday 29 August 2005 22:52, Zac Medico wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > Please test this out; if you want to test the EAPI checking, tag
> > EAPI=1 into an ebuild, and try making emerge bail.
>
> Well, it bails too often. :)
>
> It seems that an explicit integer conversion is needed for > and
11 matches
Mail list logo
