Mike Frysinger posted on Sat, 24 Sep 2011 01:10:43 -0400 as excerpted:
> it was purely to keep people from continuing to whine with circular
> logic.
> if bugzilla had a way to temporarily lock comments, i would have used
> that.
In theory, that'd be a useful feature. In fact, probably not so m
On 09/24/2011 08:24 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Friday, September 23, 2011 17:44:50 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2
packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those
revisions with a patch that alters macro identi
On Friday, September 23, 2011 17:44:50 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2
> packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those
> revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's
> zlib incompatible
On Friday, September 23, 2011 18:02:50 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that
> >
> > deals with it was locked from public view:
> >https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179
>
> Is there any good reason why this bug is dev-only?
On Friday, September 23, 2011 19:30:15 Alec Warner wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
> >
> > wrote:
> >> Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him
> >> after setting the group re
Andreas K. Huettel posted on Sat, 24 Sep 2011 00:02:50 +0200 as excerpted:
>> It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that
>> deals with it was locked from public view:
>>
>>https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179
>
> Is there any good reason why this bug is dev
Now that I finally have some time for Gentoo.I'd like to get GCC 4.6 unmasked
sometime in the next month. Thanks to everyone but me, we only have a few
bugs remaining on the tracker. None of them I consider critical except maybe
mplayer (I'd like someone from media-video to look at applying that
On 09/24/2011 03:23 AM, Brian Harring wrote:
[...] Right now, zlib does the
exact opposite of what should be done; Vapier changed zlib, and tries to
fix the packages that break because of that change. The correct way to
handle it is to let zlib be, and fix the packages that stopped working
with
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 02:58:02AM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 09/24/2011 02:40 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
> >> This was just another episode of Vapier's hostile and arrogant behavior
> >> towards users. Every time someone comes up with a valid argument of why
> >> he's wrong, the final answe
On 09/24/2011 02:40 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
This was just another episode of Vapier's hostile and arrogant behavior
towards users. Every time someone comes up with a valid argument of why
he's wrong, the final answer is "don't care, I do what I please because I'm
the dev and you're not." So my r
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 09/24/2011 02:10 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2
>>> packages currently in the tree. The maintain
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> This was just another episode of Vapier's hostile and arrogant behavior
> towards users. Every time someone comes up with a valid argument of why
> he's wrong, the final answer is "don't care, I do what I please because I'm
> the dev and
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
> wrote:
>> Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him
>> after
>> setting the group restriction.
>>
>
> That's not a very nice thing to do.
I un-hide the
On 09/24/2011 02:10 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2
packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those
revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, m
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2
> packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those
> revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's zlib
> incompatible with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 09/23/2011 11:18 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> On Freitag 23 September 2011 23:54:09 Markos Chandras wrote:
>>
>> Why are you discussing this in the -dev ML since there is already
>> an open bug about this? This is clearly a problem(if any) wit
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
wrote:
> Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him after
> setting the group restriction.
>
That's not a very nice thing to do.
However, Nikos didn't behave nicely either, so I don't quite blame
vapier for his act
On Freitag 23 September 2011 23:54:09 Markos Chandras wrote:
>
> Why are you discussing this in the -dev ML since there is already an
> open bug about this? This is clearly a problem(if any) with the zlib
> packages + maintainer. We ( as individual devs ) can't do much. If you
> want to push this f
> It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that
> deals with it was locked from public view:
>
>https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179
Is there any good reason why this bug is dev-only? Going over the contents I
dont see any.
(And we've been bickering in far wo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 09/23/2011 10:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and
> -r2 packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed
> those revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, ma
I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2
packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those
revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's
zlib incompatible with upstream. As a result, a lot of packages stopped
building. Bu
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:39:11 +0200
> Corentin Chary wrote:
>
>> ## Also update eix database, because we use eix internaly
>> ## Bottleneck: disk and cpu
>> ##Time: 30mn ~ 1h
>> eix-update
>
> Using egencache to keep caches for overlays will
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011, Tim Harder wrote:
>> As these are virtuals, I won't expect that there will be much
>> maintenance required. Also, all of them will fall back to (at
>> least) one herd.
> Personally I don't see why all of these need specific maintainers
> beyond the herds they fall under
23 matches
Mail list logo
