Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: properly handle metadata transfer on first sync of an empty tree (#96410)

2005-08-06 Thread Zac Medico
Brian D. Harring wrote: Hola all, patch (incvs now) to fix up a traceback on first sync with an empty tree; bug #96410 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96410 The fix isn't exactly what I'd call pretty (creating an intermediate portdbapi and config instance to do the updates), but it's a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: Disable logging during pkg_config (#99527)

2005-08-08 Thread Zac Medico
Drake Wyrm wrote: Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When logging is enabled, ebuild output is passed via tee. Running anything that checks for terminal type inside of pkg_config therefore doesn't work correctly. This patch disables logging during pkg_config altogether. There was a

[gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: refactor emerge spinner (#102073)

2005-08-10 Thread Zac Medico
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102073 Author: Zac Medico Some refactoring could help make the emerge code more maintainable. I have written a trivial patch that encapsulates the spinner code into an object. This patch only reorganizes code and should not cause any regressions

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Environment Whitelisting

2005-08-21 Thread Zac Medico
Alec Warner wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Was talking with Brian about the build environment and how settings were to be passed into the build environment. Essentially three scenarios were presented. 1) The full environment is passed to the build environment. This was

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: initial EAPI awareness

2005-08-31 Thread Zac Medico
Brian Harring wrote: Round 3, fixed all uglyness. You *will* see uglyness for the changeover from flat_list to flat_hash if you're setting portdbapi.auxdbmodule to flat_hash, but that's a one time hit, and is the reason we blow away the cache on portage upgrades. Either way, full patch,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: initial EAPI awareness

2005-09-01 Thread Zac Medico
Brian Harring wrote: Round 3, fixed all uglyness. You *will* see uglyness for the changeover from flat_list to flat_hash if you're setting portdbapi.auxdbmodule to flat_hash, but that's a one time hit, and is the reason we blow away the cache on portage upgrades. Either way, full patch,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: initial EAPI awareness

2005-09-01 Thread Zac Medico
Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Wednesday 31 August 2005 14:57, Brian Harring wrote: Re: tagging EAPI at the top of a file, infra would probably shoot me for doing such- till a live, fully compatible and *roughly* equivalent parser is available, portage would have to do a bit of grepping, jacking

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: initial EAPI awareness

2005-09-02 Thread Zac Medico
Brian Harring wrote: On Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 10:27:44PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: A better approach IMO would be to store the EAPI in a separate file such as metadata.xml. This would allow *absolute* flexibility in the ebuild format. Portage would be able to select an appropriate parser

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New possible developer

2005-09-07 Thread Zac Medico
Rafael Fernández López wrote: Hi, This is Rafael Fernández López. I'm a spanish student (computer engineering) and I'd like to know if I can do some work for portage... like translating it to spanish or if I see any bugs, fix them. I'm starting to read portage code, and I'd like to know if

[gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: ebuild unpack sources ${T}/environment during setup phase (bug 85803)

2005-09-07 Thread Zac Medico
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85803 This trivial patch seems to work for me but I'm not sure if it will cause regressions or not. Feedback is appreciated. Zac Index: portage-2.0.51.22/bin/ebuild.sh === ---

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] The road ahead...

2005-10-16 Thread Zac Medico
Jason Stubbs wrote: It will likely be that some of the bugs marked against 108262 won't be fixed in time. Perhaps it would have been better to just open a metabug when the branch is opened and mark bugs against it as they are fixed. It's nice to have a list of open bugs against the release

[gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: Bumping portage to top of dependancy list (bug 48531)

2005-10-18 Thread Zac Medico
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=48531 This simple patch automatically bumps portage to the top of the merge list. I've always wanted this feature and it is a dependency of bug 108262. Feedback please. :) Zac Index: bin/emerge

[gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: KeyError in dblink.unmerge (bug 100479)

2005-10-18 Thread Zac Medico
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100479 The problem here is that we are iterating through pkgfiles.keys() and inside the iteration loop we modify the obj variable so subsequent calls to pkgfiles[obj] may fail. The obvious solution is to use a separate variable for the pkgfiles key. My

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] ebuild path/to/ebuild rpm does not work, spec files aren't generated

2005-10-26 Thread Zac Medico
m h wrote: Hmmm, then I must be missing where the spec file gets generated, because there is no code in ebuild.py that does it... A little grep -r rpm /usr/lib/portage led me to a dyn_spec() function inside /usr/lib/portage/bin/ebuild.sh. Zac -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage

2005-11-16 Thread Zac Medico
capitalista wrote: zmedico requested that I let you guys know about this idea via the mailing list, so here you go. Feel free to check it out at http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112779. So, basically, you want to have multiple directories that the traditional /etc/portage inherits

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage

2005-11-18 Thread Zac Medico
Brian Harring wrote: Adding another configurable to control it gets back to my point- should be a simple, extensible *singular* method of doing this, not N methods. Agreed. Not so much transactional as groupping/seperation of each apps files. (sort of). The type of changes you're talking

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: parallel-fetch

2005-11-18 Thread Zac Medico
Brian Harring wrote: The modification is pretty straight forward offhand; the notable difference this time around is rather then extending portage_exec to have the capability to 'spawn' python funcs (something I always found ugly), this handles the fork itself. This patch seems to work well

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage

2005-11-19 Thread Zac Medico
capitalista wrote: Is /etc/portage/includes really necessary? In my bug I said that a possibility could be for /etc/portage/package.* directories. zmedico coded it up so that it would be /usr/portage/includes/kde/ (yes, I like using kde as an example). What about just allowing for

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage

2005-11-21 Thread Zac Medico
capitalista wrote: The file grouping would be excellent in the sense that you could tar up a directory and make it available for others people to use, and all you would need to do is extract it to /etc/portage/includes. Does it often make sense to group a set of package.* files together?

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage

2005-11-21 Thread Zac Medico
capitalista wrote: I'd be happier if, pending you indeed went the source route, you'd source directories and not files. You could have another file that would contain info on the other directories, or maybe put in a variable in make.conf like PORTDIR_OVERLAY, creating /etc/portage/includes style

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage

2005-11-25 Thread Zac Medico
Marius Mauch wrote: Ok, patch is now available at dev.gentoo.org/~genone/patches/portage-recursive-grab+config.diff That's an interesting approach. I'd be interested to see what people think about modifying grabdict to append later values to earlier ones (rather than overwrite them). Zac

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] PATCH: parallel-fetch

2005-11-30 Thread Zac Medico
Brian Harring wrote: 2) Display a warning message via an atexit hook when parallel-fetching is enabled, in order to alert the user that background fetching may _still_ be in progress if emerge appears to hang after an ebuild dies (this happened to me while kde-3.5 was fetching in the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] .53, .54 and beyond...

2005-12-05 Thread Zac Medico
Ned Ludd wrote: On Mon, 2005-12-05 at 23:06 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: Okay, new suggestion. Postpone the cache rewrite from above. Have only the minimal mods necessary to fix the PORT_LOGDIR/tee bug. Include the other two as is. That would be 2.0.54 as per the attached patch. Get that out

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] DepSet

2005-12-07 Thread Zac Medico
Zac Medico wrote: 1) Save test_conditionals.py in your PYTHONPATH as portage/test/ebuild/test_conditionals.py 2) Run `trial portage.test.ebuild` and watch it fail. 3) Apply DepSet-AndRestriction.patch then watch the previous test succeed. 4) Run vdb-depset-test.py to try it on your whole

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] rsync metadata cache patch (obsoletes metadata transfer on sync)

2006-01-01 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Gaffney wrote: | Why hasn't this been done before? I'm nowhere near an expert on the | portage internals, but this looks like it was pretty easy. Well, the cache related code has had a lot of changes lately due to Brian's cache backport

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [patch] dont run ldconfig unless libraries are actually installed

2006-01-17 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: Mike Frysinger wrote: makelinks is set to 1 by default when upgrading a package so that running ldconfig will update any shared lib links ... however, if the package doesnt install any libraries, then there's no point

[gentoo-portage-dev] [gentoo-dev-portage] [PATCH] prevent world file corruption by writing atomically

2006-01-24 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, There is dangerous handling of world file updates throughout portage. The attached patch wraps all world file updates in a write_atomic() function which is designed to prevent interprocess interference and prevent corruption when an 'out

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [gentoo-dev-portage] [PATCH] prevent world file corruption by writing atomically

2006-01-24 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: the atomic writing of data in writedict could be gutted out to a derivative of the file class; via that, same underlying atomic update code for writedict and wordfile updates... Hmm, override the constructor and close

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [gentoo-dev-portage] [PATCH] prevent world file corruption by writing atomically

2006-01-25 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: Brian Harring wrote: the atomic writing of data in writedict could be gutted out to a derivative of the file class; via that, same underlying atomic update code for writedict and wordfile updates... Hmm, override

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] rsync metadata cache patch (obsoletes metadata transfer on sync)

2006-01-28 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: I was playing with the metadata cache stuff this weekend and decided to write a patch that obsoletes metadata transfers on sync. I have reimplemented the previous patch as a normal cache module that adds a writable layer on top

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] rsync metadata cache patch (obsoletes metadata transfer on sync)

2006-01-29 Thread Zac Medico
: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD3JMf/ejvha5XGaMRAitfAKDrw2C09xIzDyMZ6nVNHdIU1K1l3wCeLvIi hD4yWTjTdRtPQyuAQQ6TtFc= =Yr2K -END PGP SIGNATURE- # Copyright: 2006 Gentoo Foundation # Author(s): Zac Medico ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) # License: GPL2 import time if not hasattr(__builtins__, set): from

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] rsync metadata cache patch (obsoletes metadata transfer on sync)

2006-01-29 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: I've implemented whiteouts so that items can now be deleted properly. The whiteouts themselves are stored inside the existing writable database (self.db_rw) in order to avoid the need for an additional storage area (similar

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] --nospinner in emerge_default_opts

2006-01-30 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 William Hubbs wrote: I just ran a test with this again, and it does look like --nospinner is not allowed in emerge_default_opts. Thank you, this is indeed a bug and I've committed a fix to trunk (2.1_preX). You can wait for the next release or

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-portage] [PATCH] prevent world file corruption by writing atomically

2006-01-30 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: Okay, I've created a file-like class called atomic_ostream and it is now used for both write_atomic() and writedict(). I've been using this patch locally with no problems. Do we have any more feedback or are people satisfied

[gentoo-portage-dev] should CATEGORY be properly documented in ebuild.5 and declared readonly in ebuild.sh?

2006-01-30 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, The subject says it all. What do y'all think? Zac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD3nja/ejvha5XGaMRAuSAAJsG/uoATFOFha6QV9bYuGJUxgosIwCfV9eh adS9Ngj/2dWrwuMnUkF54B0= =i9iu -END PGP

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] atexit does not work with os.execv

2006-02-05 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, While auditing the code related to bug 117988, I've noticed that it calls portageexit() directly because the normal atexit hooks do not work with the os.execv call when portage restarts itself. Currently, several other atexit hooks

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-portage] [PATCH] prevent world file corruption by writing atomically

2006-02-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:21:22AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: Zac Medico wrote: Okay, I've created a file-like class called atomic_ostream and it is now used for both write_atomic() and writedict(). I've been using this patch

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-portage] [PATCH] prevent world file corruption by writing atomically

2006-02-12 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:21:22AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: Zac Medico wrote: Okay, I've created a file-like class called atomic_ostream and it is now used for both write_atomic() and writedict(). I've been using this patch

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Allow emerge to save its --resume data (bug 122527)

2006-02-13 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122527 When emerge would normally discard resume data, the attached patch causes it to save the resume data in mtimedb[resume_backup] if the length of the mergelist is greater than 1. When the user calls

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-2.1_pre5

2006-02-22 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rumen Yotov wrote: On Wednesday 22 February 2006 03:07, Alec Warner wrote: Your testing is appreciated. [1]http://dev.gentoo.org/~zmedico/overlay/sys-apps/portage/portage-2.1_pre5 .ebuild Hi, The install went w/o errors, but there's a problem

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-2.1_pre5

2006-02-22 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paul Varner wrote: On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 20:07 -0500, Alec Warner wrote: Your testing is appreciated. The only thing that I have noted so far is that every emerge command is printing ** before it does anything else. For example: # emerge -pv

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-2.1_pre5

2006-02-22 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paul Varner wrote: On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 20:07 -0500, Alec Warner wrote: Your testing is appreciated. I'll file a bug for this one, once I investigate further. 'genlop -t' doesn't get along with it very well. # genlop -t screen *

[gentoo-portage-dev] vdb-update script (for global updates) with job progress framework

2006-02-28 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, I've been working on a script for doing global updates on packages installed in the vdb (related to bug 122089). It's called vdb-update [1] and it does basically the same thing as fixpackages but it works on installed packages

[gentoo-portage-dev] factoring miscellaneous shell code and logic out of ebuild.sh (into doebuild)

2006-03-06 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, The current state of ebuild.sh is that it's been abused to perform miscellaneous shell tasks that are triggered before or after various ebuild phases. In order to rectify the situation, I propose that we factor out any logic and

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] kudoos to all

2006-03-15 Thread Zac Medico
/var/cache/edb/dep. This one goes to Zac Medico, the current release coordinator, and builds on Brian's work to cut out cache updating altogether. New in pre6 and in need of testing - especially when local modifications are made - but very promising. Before I switched from rsync to cvs I used

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Manifest2 reloaded

2006-03-15 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: Marius Mauch schrieb: The first should be delayed until there is some consensus how the gpg stuff should work in the future, the others I don't see the use for. Also I only checked portage.py for changes, so emerge/repoman/...

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] eix esearch problems with portage-2.1_pre6-r3

2006-03-18 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rumen Yotov wrote: Hi, Recently have problems with latest portage-2.1_pre6-r3, specially when using eix and now esearch too. In the former case (eix) it gives too little packages in the database: Strange is that this happened just after i

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] eix esearch problems with portage-2.1_pre6-r3

2006-03-18 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rumen Yotov wrote: On Saturday 18 March 2006 10:14, Rumen Yotov wrote: Updating Portage cache: 100% === # update-eix Reading Portage settings .. Building database (/var/cache/eix) from scratch .. [0] /var/portage/ (cache: backport)

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Short question

2006-03-18 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 tvali wrote: Is /usr/lib/portage/pym dir and /usr/bin/emerge files together the whole portage (excluding package tree)? Is there any portage code outside those dirs? Does `cat /var/db/pkg/sys-apps/portage-*/CONTENTS` answer your question? You

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] eix esearch problems with portage-2.1_pre6-r3

2006-03-18 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rumen Yotov wrote: On Saturday 18 March 2006 10:44, Zac Medico wrote: If that's all you've done, then please file a bug for the CacheCorruption error. The error that you've received could be related to this: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id

[gentoo-portage-dev] python trace support for --debug mode

2006-03-22 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, I've written a patch [1] that adds support for tracing python. It uses pythons debugger hooks [2] to trace execution events (mostly function calls and returns). The patch causes python tracing to be enabled in --debug mode if

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] rewriting the ldconfig logic

2006-04-04 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: On Saturday 01 April 2006 17:17, Zac Medico wrote: Mike Frysinger wrote: i thought about this some more ... why do we even care about the mtimes during package merge ? if a package doesnt install any files into a libdir

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] portage management node

2006-04-09 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian wrote: Just a word of caution. I don't know why but sometimes after an upgrade of portage a reload(portage) in porthole fails and porthole crashes. I don't remember the details atm and have not investigated the reasons. In all cases

[gentoo-portage-dev] should we add userpriv and usersandox to make.globals FEATURES?

2006-04-10 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, What do people think about adding userpriv and usersandox to make.globals FEATURES? I've been using these for a long time and haven't had any trouble with them. Are there any arguments against making them default? Zac -BEGIN PGP

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] should we add userpriv and usersandox to make.globals FEATURES?

2006-04-10 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 10 April 2006 08:08, Ned Ludd wrote: On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 02:24 -0700, Zac Medico wrote: What do people think about adding userpriv and usersandox to make.globals FEATURES? I've been using these for a long time

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] Stablizing portage 2.1

2006-05-01 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: Alec Warner schrieb: Why Branch at 2.1_pre9? Manifest2 is already in the tree and needs refinement. Branching at pre7 is also a canidate, but i would rather press for keeping manifest2 in the tree and

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Stablizing portage 2.1

2006-05-01 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: Zmedico did a lot of things with usage of global variables, however I think that getting all that tested ( especially in scripts that we don't keep track of ) is detremental to getting portage stable. I agree that it's an

[gentoo-portage-dev] feature freeze for 2.1

2006-05-02 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, The 2006.1 release is scheduled for this coming August and there are a lot of people counting on portage-2.1 being stable in time for that release. In order to ensure that this happens, we need to stop the addition of new features.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] feature freeze for 2.1

2006-05-03 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Simon Stelling wrote: Zac Medico wrote: the addition of new features. From this time forward, please do not commit anything to the 2.1 branch (current trunk) unless it is a fix for functionality that already exists. Thank you in advance

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] backend support for FEATURES=debug-build (again)

2006-05-10 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: no one responded last time about this patch so lets try one more time :P backend support for FEATURES=debug-build ... no hooks/hacks/etc... included here to handle a user interface `emerge --debug-build` -mike This type

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 'emerge' request: make --tree not imply --pretend

2006-06-24 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dan Corson wrote: I am sorry, you are indeed correct. What I should have requested is: a way to have the package list output in non-interactive, package-installing (that is, not --pretend) execution. Sure, that's easy. I know of at least one

[gentoo-portage-dev] New emerge --mindeps option for exclusion of build time dependencies (bug #132355)

2006-07-11 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, The attached patch for bug #132355 [1] adds a --mindeps option for emerge that effectively allows build time dependencies to be excluded from dependency calculations involving binary and installed packages. With this patch, it's

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New emerge --mindeps option for exclusion of build time dependencies (bug #132355)

2006-07-12 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ned Ludd wrote: Please invert the logic so that rather than changing default behavior you add a new option choose the types of deps to include. Can you explain how my proposed change in the default behavior of --usepkg is going to hurt things?

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New emerge --mindeps option for exclusion of build time dependencies (bug #132355)

2006-07-12 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ned Ludd wrote: On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 08:22 -0700, Zac Medico wrote: Ned Ludd wrote: Please invert the logic so that rather than changing default behavior you add a new option choose the types of deps to include. Can you explain how my

[gentoo-portage-dev] new portageq metadata function to wrap dbapi.aux_get()

2006-07-13 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, It's come to my attention that the built_with_use function in eutils.eclass accesses the installed package database directly. This is a major problem because it prevents us from being able to have an alternative installed package

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Porage API Documentation Proposal

2006-07-17 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris White wrote: Here's round 3. I've striped out the known issues, since everyone know nows them. Replaced that missing link, and clarified on the give an example bit. It looks good to me. I've taken the liberty of committing your pkgcomp

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage.py splitout

2006-07-20 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris White wrote: Hi, While doing some documenting on what functions needed to be documented for the API documentation project, I found that portage.py seems to be quite a dumping ground for functions:

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [RFC] Naming Conventions

2006-07-22 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris White wrote: 1) Create aliases to the new functions, then at some yet-to-be-determined point, kill the aliases and bomb on the scripts (this suffers from procrastination). 2) Make an official release with the new function names and no

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage phase hooks patch

2006-07-22 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Kelly wrote: Hello, This is that patch I had mentioned earlier on #gentoo-portage. It works by sourcing every script found in /var/libexec/portage/hooks/{pre,post}_${EBUILD_PHASE} at the appropriate time. In my case, I feel this

[gentoo-portage-dev] modular QA checks for repoman

2006-07-23 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, The Java team is trying to migrate all the Java ebuilds to the Generation 2 [1] system for building Java packages. They would like to have support included in repoman in order to help enforce the migration. Please see the attached

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Atom matching behavior

2006-08-02 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: On Tuesday 01 August 2006 15:49, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: - =sys-libs/db-1.8* matches 1.85 (found in net-nds/directoryadministrator) - =app-text/docbook-xsl-stylesheets-1.6* matches 1.68.1 and 1.69.1 (found in

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] per-package use.mask (bug 96368)

2006-08-03 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, I've written a patch [1] that adds support for package.use.mask in the profile. It should behave exactly as use.mask currently does except that it allows USE flags to be masked for specific packages rather than for all packages. In

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] per-package use.mask (bug 96368)

2006-08-04 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:23:58PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: Hi everyone, I've written a patch [1] that adds support for package.use.mask in the profile. It should behave exactly as use.mask currently does except

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] per-package use.mask (bug 96368)

2006-08-04 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 12:38:39PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: I haven't seen a specification for use dependencies yet, so I'm not quite sure how they'd work. cat/pkg-ver[use1,use2,-use3,use4] cat/pkg-ver[use] etc. Okay, so

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] use.force and package.use.force (bug #142853)

2006-08-06 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, I've written a patch [1] that implements support for use.force and package.use.force as originally described by Sven Wegener [2] over a year ago. Basically, this feature is the exact opposite of use.mask and package.use.mask. It

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] per-package use.mask (bug 96368)

2006-08-06 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 02:54:36AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: seems to me that we'd also have to implement use-dep matching in order to correctly support use-dep syntax. If you were actually supporting use deps, yes. You're

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] use.force and package.use.force (bug #142853)

2006-08-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: You're asking on the wrong ml. Profile monkeying really should include a run through of -dev, *especially* something like that that's going to be a pita to turn off when folks start abusing it... I'm just running it by the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] use.force and package.use.force (bug #142853)

2006-08-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: Zac Medico wrote: Users can unforce them via /etc/portage/profile/{use.force,package.use.force} in the usual -flag way. Why new files? Why isn't this just pushed into the use stacking order over-ridable by the user

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Moving ebuild-related where they belong

2006-09-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Simon Stelling wrote: repo-level profile, we move parts of the EAPI out into the tree, which is a bad idea because we are unable to support multiple versions. As the EAPI needed for the ebuild is unknown when sourcing install-helpers.eclass, we're

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Moving ebuild-related where they belong

2006-09-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Simon Stelling wrote: Brian Harring wrote: B) fragmentation this implicitly enables isn't good. I agree here. Fragmentation is always a potential with free and open software. People can fork if they want or collaborate if they want. The

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Moving ebuild-related where they belong

2006-09-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Simon Stelling wrote: Zac Medico wrote: Well, if the metadata generation step is viewed as being separate from the rest, and the helpers aren't needed during that step, then it's possible to get the EAPI from the ebuild without the helpers being

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Moving ebuild-related where they belong

2006-09-08 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: Just so we're clear... if gentoo-x86 wants to define their own base template all ebuilds in that repo use, that's fine. That's a different beast from moving the format definition into the tree though. Kind of curious if

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Moving ebuild-related where they belong

2006-09-08 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: Zac Medico wrote: Incompatible changes for a given EAPI specification are simply unacceptable. People really should know better than that. If not, educate them. See this is a bad idea. If you give them a hand, they take

[gentoo-portage-dev] [Fwd: RFC: per-package default USE flags]

2006-10-13 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Forwarding here in case anyone isn't subscribed to gentoo-dev. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFL2E9/ejvha5XGaMRAmRoAKDiwYChPwHBhMLXaXAhExP9ndp4KQCfex+w EUJa+X8LjRT+DOu94Ew2wxw= =CzYX -END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] RFC: new virtual metadata variable to list combined deps

2006-10-26 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: So now I was wondering a) if I'm the only one who finds this feature useful and b) if adding it at the dbapi level (in dbapi.aux_get) would be considered a good idea, so it could be used by other tools? I think of aux_get as a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Replace --ask with --pretend if operation not allowed

2006-11-14 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Barkalow wrote: If some operation requires root or portage access, and the user doesn't have it, and the --ask option is enabled, replace it with --pretend instead of aborting with an error. Thanks, that's a good idea. I've committed a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] --config-root command-line option

2006-11-17 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: And last but not least a CLI option is bound to emerge, but this feature can also be useful for other tools. Checking an env var in the config class would enable it implicitly for all users of portage.py, without it everyone

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Repoman SVN support

2006-11-24 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Fabian Groffen wrote: Please find attached the patch of the prefix repoman sources against the current trunk. I like the idea of having svn support, but I think it will be much nicer if we separate the cvs and svn support into plugins. That way,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] keyword anti-match (foo/-foo) overrides other matches

2006-12-01 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Barkalow wrote: On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Zac Medico wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Barkalow wrote: If the configuration has keywords foo bar, and a package has -foo bar, mask the package (masked by -bar keyword

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Masked by corruption

2006-12-20 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Cloos wrote: I'm getting an inordinate number of masked- by corruption failures since merging portage-2.1.2_rc3-r7. Do you get a !!! Digest verification failed: message before that, or only the masked by: corruption message? Assuming that

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Possible bug in portdbapi.xmatch()

2006-12-24 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian wrote: Changing: vers = self.get_versions() To: vers = self.get_versions()[:] # make a copy It's fixed in svn r5382. Thanks! Zac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Masked by corruption

2007-01-01 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Cloos wrote: Thanks for the replies; my apologies for the delay in repying back Based on the replies, I was able to track the problem down. The cdb patch is incompatable with the latest version of portage. Removing that from

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] recent changes in the way pkgsplit() and company work

2007-02-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, but I didn't have an internet connection for January to notice but when I upgraded to 2.1.2-r7 pkgsplit, catpkgsplit, catsplit no longer accepted ebuild strings with any atoms. Porthole was crashing in several

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] recent changes in the way pkgsplit() and company work

2007-02-07 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Zac Medico wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, but I didn't have an internet connection for January to notice but when I upgraded to 2.1.2-r7 pkgsplit, catpkgsplit, catsplit no longer accepted ebuild strings with any atoms. Porthole

[gentoo-portage-dev] [RFC] trigger to stop Manifest1 generation (bug #167667)

2007-02-20 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=167667 In order so smoothly and transparently drop Manifest1, it seems like we'll need a toggle built into portage so that it automatically drops Manifest1 when appropriate. The need for this toggle will be

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [RFC] Guessing a package by short name

2007-03-15 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alec Warner wrote: My only concern is about consistency. IE the portage backend (if I recall correctly) should return all matching nodes; emerge would then take that list and find the first one that matches in the vdb. However it becomes a bit

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] docbook-sgml-util build problem

2007-05-16 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 George Hedfors wrote: Hi list This is my first post and I just joined so I apologize if the question already has been raised previously. I've been trying to build the docbook-sgml-util package now for a while without success. Nothing on the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] License filtering and packages sets

2007-07-30 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: Hi list, I would like to know what is the status of license filtering and packages sets in trunk version of Portage. Documentation is very poor in these cases and I hope that I'm not disturbing you. I

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >