Re: [gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

Also of note is that the bopm confug uses blacklists other than njabl which are still active.

Re: [gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Michael Mol wrote: > On Thursday, August 25, 2016 07:29:35 PM Raymond Jennings wrote: > > I still use bopm, and it built fine last time I emerged it. > > > > If hopm isn't in the tree yet, why was bopm still pmasked for removal? > > > > Reason

Re: [gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

On Thursday, August 25, 2016 07:29:35 PM Raymond Jennings wrote: > I still use bopm, and it built fine last time I emerged it. > > If hopm isn't in the tree yet, why was bopm still pmasked for removal? > > Reason for asking is I'm curious about removal procedures. I was under the > impression

Re: [gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

>From the dev mailing list: # Pacho Ramos (21 Aug 2016) # Dead for a long time in favour of hopm, bug #473754. # Removal in a month. net-misc/bopm On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 2:40 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: > On 08/25/2016 07:29 PM, Raymond Jennings wrote: > > I

Re: [gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

On 08/25/2016 07:29 PM, Raymond Jennings wrote: > I still use bopm, and it built fine last time I emerged it. > > If hopm isn't in the tree yet, why was bopm still pmasked for removal? > > Reason for asking is I'm curious about removal procedures. I was under > the impression that replacement

[gentoo-user] removal of bopm before hopm is in tree

I still use bopm, and it built fine last time I emerged it. If hopm isn't in the tree yet, why was bopm still pmasked for removal? Reason for asking is I'm curious about removal procedures. I was under the impression that replacement packages get added to the tree before their obsolete