Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-15 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 11:01:56AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: On Saturday 15 April 2006 03:31, Brian Harring wrote: cache backend selection (failed import == defaults to sys default) This is incorrect. It displays an error

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Philipp Riegger
On Apr 7, 2006, at 5:26 PM, Alec Warner wrote: We have a new cache format, confcache, parallel fetch, etc... The bonus is these features are already mature and relatively old ( a year + as of now ). Reading about confcache i have one question: When i saw, that this feature exists (in

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 05:15:53PM +0200, Philipp Riegger wrote: On Apr 7, 2006, at 5:26 PM, Alec Warner wrote: We have a new cache format, confcache, parallel fetch, etc... The bonus is these features are already mature and relatively old ( a year + as of now ). Reading about

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Alec Warner
Brian Harring wrote: On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 05:15:53PM +0200, Philipp Riegger wrote: On Apr 7, 2006, at 5:26 PM, Alec Warner wrote: We have a new cache format, confcache, parallel fetch, etc... The bonus is these features are already mature and relatively old ( a year + as of now ).

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 02:10:27PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: Brian Harring wrote: it. But it did not work because i had not emerged confcache. I think this check should be stricter, if i want confcache and have FEATURES=confcache and confcache is not emerged, i think emerge ... should

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Saturday 15 April 2006 03:31, Brian Harring wrote: Sidenote, why is userfetch a feature? That seems like something that should be userpriv by default to me... It broke somebody's ftp setup. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92960 -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
s/ftp/nfs/ in the mail that I just sent. -- Jason Stubbsw -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Saturday 15 April 2006 03:31, Brian Harring wrote: cache backend selection (failed import == defaults to sys default) This is incorrect. It displays an error message and quits. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-14 Thread Brian Harring
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 11:01:56AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: On Saturday 15 April 2006 03:31, Brian Harring wrote: cache backend selection (failed import == defaults to sys default) This is incorrect. It displays an error message and quits. Still leaves the other features then (and raises

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-10 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Saturday 08 April 2006 21:48, Ned Ludd wrote: On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 11:18 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: On Saturday 08 April 2006 07:36, Ned Ludd wrote: On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 14:19 -0400, solar wrote: FEATURES=buildpkg ROOT=/ emerge gcc rm -rf /dev/shm/foo ROOT=/dev/shm/foo

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-08 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Zac Medico wrote: Well, please file a bug then. How are we supposed to fix bugs that we aren't aware of? :) With the portage regression test suite, of course. =) Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-07 Thread Ned Ludd
On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 13:13 -0700, Zac Medico wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, I think the current quality level of the 2.1 branch is good enough to make it a release candidate. From my perspective, it seems like a waste of everyone's time to roll a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-07 Thread Alec Warner
Zac Medico wrote: This kind of thing will be less of a problem if we shorten the period of the release cycle. If we shorted it to 2 months or so, then it won't matter much when something gets bumped to the next cycle. Also this isn't exactly news to you all as I sent my intentions

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-07 Thread solar
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 21:06 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: On Friday 07 April 2006 20:54, Ned Ludd wrote: Handling of the || () in ROOT!=/ via the -K option is not in that good of shape in 2.1_NXX and can't really be used. Till that's addressed 2.1(re-ping jason) in my eyes absolutely should

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: See my problem is that some of the features proposed aren't two month testing features. Particularly when you rewrite decent portions of the application you need longer than two months to get decent testing coverage. Sure Unit

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-07 Thread Ned Ludd
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 14:19 -0400, solar wrote: On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 21:06 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: On Friday 07 April 2006 20:54, Ned Ludd wrote: Handling of the || () in ROOT!=/ via the -K option is not in that good of shape in 2.1_NXX and can't really be used. Till that's

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?

2006-04-06 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:11:49 -0700 Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The manifest code doesn't have very many use cases so I'd expect that we would have hit most major problems by now (even with a small sample). Any necessary changes are likely to be small patches. As an alternative, we

[Fwd: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon?]

2006-04-06 Thread Alec Warner
Sorry, send with wrong address earlier. Original Message Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2.1 release candidate soon? Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 20:09:06 -0400 From: Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN