On 17 August 2013 16:28, heroxbd wrote:
> Arun Raghavan writes:
>
>> There are images available for this, btw, if you want to see how it
>> works and poke around. I'd seen some repositories, but don't know if
>> there's enough public to do your own bui
I think it's great that
you're kicking this off and that there is so much enthusiasm for this.
I look forward to seeing the solutions that emerge to solve all of
these, and am happy to offer to test on a device or two.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
nderstanding here. He only said that if you
>> want to run Gnome 3.8, then switch to systemd. Because the Gnome team
>> will not support any other configuration.
>>
>> He did not say that everyone should install systemd, nor that you need
>> to support su
ause they already have github accounts or ...?
> such as code reviews, which the Gentoo's gitolite interface does not have.
GNOME and others provide Splinter as a review system on bugzilla.
Coupled with git bz, that should make the patch submission + review
process comparably simple. Thoughts?
On 8 May 2013 21:51, Ben de Groot wrote:
[...]
> Where upstreams ship systemd units, I don't think there is any issue.
> The problem is you are asking Gentoo maintainers to add unit files
> that upstream is not shipping. In this case we should test and
> maintain these ourselves, which is an addit
On 2 April 2013 08:17, Alex Xu wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kill zeroconf and use "dnssd", "upnp", "ssdp". Problem solved?
I'm not too enthusiastic about that.
USE=zeroconf on pulseaudio is a bit easier to understan
On 5 February 2013 23:58, Pacho Ramos wrote:
[...]
> media-sound/dbmeasure
[...]
I'll keep this one.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 21 December 2012 18:02, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> On 21 December 2012 17:36, Ciaran McCreesh
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:21:57 +
>> Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> Your tone is not appropriate for discussion. If you don't like the
>>> existing p
s ignore the tone of an
argument, regardless of whether it is justified or not.
I find that Markos' objection is not unfounded and your argument is
irrelevant here.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 19 November 2012 11:00, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:43:44AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> On 18 November 2012 16:41, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> [...]
>> > media-sound/dbmeasure
>> I'll take this one, since it's tangentially
On 18 November 2012 16:41, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
[...]
> media-sound/dbmeasure
I'll take this one, since it's tangentially related to PulseAudio.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 15 June 2012 10:33, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 15 June 2012 12:45, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> On 15 June 2012 09:58, Greg KH wrote:
>>> So, anyone been thinking about this? I have, and it's not pretty.
>>>
>>> Minor details like, "do we have a &#
On 15 June 2012 10:26, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:15:28AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> On 15 June 2012 09:58, Greg KH wrote:
>> > So, anyone been thinking about this? I have, and it's not pretty.
>> >
>> > Should I worry about thi
ot;do we have a 'company' that can pay Microsoft to
> sign our bootloader?" is one aspect from the non-technical side that I've
> been wondering about.
Sounds like something the Gentoo Foundation could do.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
good enough for you.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | G
itramfs flamewars?
> http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
You seem to have missed the bit that this has nothing at all to do with systemd.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
rs have patches which touch autoconf files but my
> existing patch set doesn't so I'm not calling eautoreconf. Does anyone
> have a suggested way to handle this?
grub2 checks for a DO_AUTORECONF env. var. to decide whether to run
eautoreconf. This does cause some QA warnings, though.
ndom-seed.c. And the
"if I naively modify things, they might explode" argument holds for
anything.
These are basic things that you almost certainly would not be
modifying as a sysadmin anyway. I'd hope that the things that you
really do want to muck around with are provided as configur
Gentoo running with busybox's mdev, instead of udev. See
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-user/msg_bc91b392ee0f76376104591cdf7dc5f0.xml
> Executive summary... look Ma; no udev!
Does mdev support all the rules we have in /lib/udev/rules.d/? The
Internet is surprisingly mute on this subject, but a quick
tional in upstream git as well, so unless someone
screams murder, I'm going to make esd support an off-by-default USE
flag for media-sound/pulseaudio as well.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
aven't been seen any effort to actually solve the problem within the
existing framework. For example, if someone cares enough, why not
write a wrapper script to track down the programs and libraries at
runtime that actually do use /usr so it's easier to say "these
packages install r
t he'll fix the problem. Would masking it
till it was fixed not suffice? Seems like a bit unjustified to me
(from information on this thread alone).
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
em layout is not something anyone in their right
> mind should deign to mimic/copy.
I didn't get that from either of the links you posted. Seems to me the
systemd developers are looking at the split as a host-specific / vs
host-independent /usr.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
oesn't explicitly specify what sub-arches are supported?
Just enable on all till someone says it doesn't work or test on all of
them first or ...?
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
warnings from our project page
> (such as "Decreasing year-over-year development activity""). Updates are
> faster of course so our stats shouldn't be outdated anymore.
>
> So go claim your commits,
Nice! Thanks for taking this up!
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 9 July 2011 12:58, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 07/09/2011 10:54 PM, Arun Raghavan (ford_prefect) wrote:
>> ford_prefect 11/07/09 19:54:34
>> - --with-udev-rules-dir="${EPREFIX}/$(get_libdir)/udev/rules.d" \
>> + --with-udev-rules-dir
-dep in most cases, and where there's a compelling reason for the
ebuild to provide an alternative (or internal) event system, have this
as a default-enabled USE-flag.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
onable. Did I miss some conversation somewhere,
because it appears that "libcanberra" got finalised [1] on (even
though I believe it's a horribly unintuitive name to foist on users).
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=354585
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
to sign all
> of them once again. Moreover, if Dev B doesn't use Manifest signing,
> the signature from Dev A is lost.
If we make the GPG signatures mandatory at some point of time, that
addresses the second of your concerns. I do not understand why the
first a problem - could you clarify
oder) has nothing to do with mad or mpg123 (which are
used to decode MP3s)
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
is threat as far off-topic as I can,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5 :p
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
y, result in
more public conflict, very likely without a complete picture of the
story on both sides being available. Devrel's purpose is to avoid
this, and I believe this does work (we can debate their efficacy or
how things can improve, but saying it doesn't work is unfair, IMO). I
don't see how your proposal would deal with this fallout.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
re humans and thus mistakes are unavoidable.
He didn't say don't make mistakes. He said, be careful and if mistakes
happen, so be it.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
only
> difference is requiring a slightly longer use_enable line.
Mostly because I don't want to coin a new term if it's not absolutely necessary.
That said, you're right - more people seem to be comfortable with
"gintrospection" than plain "introspection". If n
can be changed
appropriately at that time if it does not use gobject-introspection).
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 20 June 2010 20:12, Arun Raghavan wrote:
[...]
> Any objections? I'll wait till Wed (June 23rd) before adding this if
> there aren't any.
Is anyone here vehemently against "introspection".
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 22 June 2010 16:54, Peter Hjalmarsson wrote:
> tis 2010-06-22 klockan 15:17 +0530 skrev Arun Raghavan:
>> On 21 June 2010 21:23, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> [...]
>> > I'm still trying to think of a good name. I understand the concerns
>> > about "intro
On 22 June 2010 15:32, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Arun Raghavan posted on Tue, 22 Jun 2010 10:43:42 +0530 as excerpted:
>
>> b) For questions like "- Should Python 3.x be stable?", isn't that for
>> team leads to decide? And for the cou
On 21 June 2010 21:23, Arun Raghavan wrote:
[...]
> I'm still trying to think of a good name. I understand the concerns
> about "introspection" being too generic and non GNOME-y, but "gir" is
> likely to cause confusion.
"gir" is not good because it g
it is clearly important to you.
In general, the way to participate in any open source project (and I
believe this holds for a team in Gentoo as well) is not - "You're
doing it wrong, let me show you how". It's a combination of, "How can
I help?" and "Why don't we t
On 22 June 2010 03:06, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Arun,
>
>
> On 06/21/10 21:25, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>>> My manifesto up here now:
>>> http://dev.gentoo.org/~sping/council-manifesto-2010-sping.txt
>>
>> For all your points where you do not have a concre
On 22 June 2010 00:57, Mark Loeser wrote:
[...]
> Hope that helps,
Indeed - thanks for the detailed response.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
lease elaborate?
""" (w.r.t. git migration)
I hope to see Robin integrate me with the conversion process.
"""
How have you contributed to the effort thus far?
Regards,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
ier for people to recognize how they can contribute, and
> improving Gentoo as a whole, are all things that the Council should be
> taking an active role in, and I want to be a part of making that happen.
Do you have any concrete ideas on how you will be doing these things?
Cheers,
I figure that now that we've started this way, and there /is/ a
benefit to it, we might as well carry it through.
I'm still trying to think of a good name. I understand the concerns
about "introspection" being too generic and non GNOME-y, but "gir" is
lik
bose to me (yes, I know we have
longer USE flags, and I find them too long as well).
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 20 June 2010 20:12, Arun Raghavan wrote:
[...]
> We already have 13 packages using this flag, with several more to
> come. The current description being used in packages' metadata.xml
> sucks - I'll put something more descriptive in the final flag.
Here's the descrip
2010/6/21 Olivier Crête :
> On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 20:12 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> I'd like to propose a new global USE-flag: introspection.
> ...
>> Any objections? I'll wait till Wed (June 23rd) before adding this if
>> there aren't any.
>
> Do
If this thread started out at some point as being constructive, it's
certainly stopped being so now. Please kill this, take some cool-off
time, and come back if there is something *constructive* to be said.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
) before adding this if
there aren't any.
Cheers!
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
s been affected.
>> Osprey has returned to service.
>>
>
> If you are using gentoo-dev please use the combination of
> gentoo-dev-announce and gentoo-dev to reach all devs instead of
> gentoo-dev and gentoo-core.
Why is gentoo-core is not enough? I thought all devs were expected
> stuff too.
Were there recent breakages to make this necessary?
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 12 April 2010 18:49, George Prowse wrote:
> On 12/04/2010 14:17, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>>
>> On 12 April 2010 18:43, George Prowse wrote:
>> [...]
>>>
>>> If you are arguing that the name is ambiguous then I think you are wrong.
>>> Gentoo knows
; litigation when trying to protect it's logo.
I think the argument is that the wiki is not always accurate, and if
perceived as the official documentation, can put is in bad light.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
ng the website redesign or consolidation of documentation
as examples, do you want them to:
a) Decide that this should be done?
b) Call for volunteers? (they obviously cannot force anyone to do it)
c) Do it themselves?
d) What you probably mean that I fail to see
Regards,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 5 April 2010 10:34, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> On 5 April 2010 08:13, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> On 5 April 2010 03:13, Joshua Saddler wrote:
[...]
> You guys should take a while to cool off at this stage.
Never mind me. I missed Ben's last email.
--
Arun Raghavan
http:/
ML coding.
You guys should take a while to cool off at this stage.
Quite frankly, the documentation project is just another open source
project - if anyone wants to change how things are done, the only real
way to do that is join the team, prove that you are dedicated and
committed, and promote change from the inside.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
-taking,
maintaining todo lists, possibly even meeting minutes. But our
official documentation should go through sufficient review and
formatting to make sure we maintain the quality of documentation that
we have had so far.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
2010/1/2 David Shakaryan :
[...]
> Once again, thank you for everything, but my time has come. Adieu!
Nomp!
All the best for the future, and hope the irresistible urge to omp
just one more ebuild brings you back. :)
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gen
pkg_postinst
All of the above? Rationale being (1) is required to check against the
kernel you're supposedly using, (2) for the kernel you definitely are
using, and (3) to make sure people remember.
An alternative to (2) and (3), though is to add a check to the udev initscript.
C
2009/8/12 Ben de Groot :
> Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> This still does not address the original problem - if
>> $external_service shuts down, is bought out, has arbitrary terms about
>> content that are not immediately clear as being unfavourable to us,
>> (at least) that p
2009/8/11 Nirbheek Chauhan :
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Arun Raghavan
> wrote:
>> The 1-2 times that I asked for access to overlays, time taken was a
>> non-issue. If others have had problems, let's fix that instead.
>
> How much effort do you estimate would
o us,
(at least) that part of the project which is hosted on is negatively
affected.
The 1-2 times that I asked for access to overlays, time taken was a
non-issue. If others have had problems, let's fix that instead.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
hat we retain control of the
infrastructure on which it (the official Gentoo project) is hosted.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
Hello,
I haven't been able to attend a council meeting for a bit since it
occurs at ~2:30 am my time, but for what it's worth:
On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 23:15 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
[...]
> 1) Agenda Topics are posted to the appropriate mailing lists at a
> MINIMUM 7 days prior to the meeting. (
On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 07:40 -0400, Thomas Anderson wrote:
[...]
> The difference is that putting the EAPI in the filename has backwards
> compatibility because package managers not knowing about this change
> won't even look at the those ebuilds. Putting EAPI as the fifth line
> completely loses th
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 20:21 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[...]
> Can't do that. The package manager has to barf on unrecognised .ebuild
> files.
I assume the reasons are the same as below.
> > If this is not viable, make an unrecognised version string cause the
> > same fallback as an unsupport
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 18:55 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[...]
> You have yet to provide an alternative for fixing the arbitrary and
> pointless version format restrictions that are currently in place.
Create an EAPI for the required changes, fast track inclusion to a
stable portage.
If this is
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 17:59 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[...]
> > Don't care. Let's fix the problems we have *now* using solutions that
> > we can agree upon, rather than try to foist solutions that a
> > reasonably large population of developers *don't* like (even after
> > extended debate) to s
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 17:47 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> Ok, what are all the things requiring format-break changes that we'll
> want in the next ten years? Please provide a complete list.
Don't care. Let's fix the problems we have *now* using solutions that we
can agree upon, rather than tr
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 12:39 -0400, Thomas Anderson wrote:
[...]
> For one, there's the restriction that all *-alpha/*-rc has to be
> represented _rc/_alpha. I plan on doing more research into perhaps
> lifting this restriction in a future EAPI, but this would of course
> require glep 55's solution.
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 16:49 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 16 May 2009 17:43:32 +0200
> Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> > > That doesn't let us do version format changes.
> >
> > Or are we talking about the *ebuild* versions? I see that as
> > different matter. Plus: You could change the versi
On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 00:44 +0200, Patrick Lauer wrote:
[...]
> So if you were a lazy Unix coder you'd just restrict the current rules a bit
> so that there's only one line starting with EAPI= allowed (or maybe you just
> take the first or last one, but that's annoying) and if no such line matche
On Sat, 2009-05-02 at 18:17 +0200, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
[...]
> I think the code can be considered GPL-2 (i will check if there is no
> header specifying something else) and for the fonts, I will have to add
> 2 licenses not in the tree at the moment.
> But what to do with the songs ? I suppose it
On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 16:35 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Here's an eclass proposal to wrap EXPORT_FUNCTIONS with auto detection
> of functions. This way all eclasses don't have to duplicate the EAPI
> detection code. If people find this useful, I will document it properly
> with eclass-manpages etc
On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 17:05 +, Mike Auty wrote:
> I realize it might be a bit obvious to us, but from reading it people
> might wonder how they're supposed to carry out installs now. When the
> notice finally goes out, it might be worth mentioning that just the
> LiveCDs are no longer supporte
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Steve Long wrote:
[...]
>>> for ((i=0;i<10;i++)); do echo /usr/share/doc/${P}/examples >
>>> /dev/null;
>>> real 11.25
>>> real 9.24
>> So that's what, on the order of 20 microseconds faster for each iteration?
>>
> Or ~18%. (You shouldn't use the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 12:46 Sun 07 Sep , Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
>> I personally agree with several others who have replied to this thread.
>> The reduction in lines of code/characters seems to introduce an uglier
>> syntax which is hard
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
[...]
> The benefit is that it's a logically separate action, and will avoid
> all the silliness of people repeatedly changing their minds about
> which phase should do the eautoreconf calls and so on.
a) Is this really an issue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Bridge wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 18:42:35 +0200
> Aniruddha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I've filed the bugreport (version bump) a year ago. It looks like borg
>> has no maintainer.
>
> So maintain it. You don't need to be a dev to write
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Please make sure you commit any changes to use.local.desc to
> metadata.xml otherwise you risk the chance of having your changes lost.
> I'm currently in the process of converting use.local.desc to
> metadata.xml. After a catego
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Doug Goldstein wrote:
[...]
> Ford_Prefect is taking gnome-base
And gnome-extra.
Cheers,
Arun
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkiN/FIACgkQ+Vqt1inD4uyqkACghaEJjvUKUeNS1EFHUpoWih9M
fW8AoIsW8a174NLcHsF/TvwkSl
n to keep the
communication channels as open as possible, but a line must be drawn
*somewhere*.
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
sts is completely beyond me.
This seems to be more of the kind of baiting that you use to cause
threads to spiral into irrelevant bickering that more than enough
people on this list are sick of having their mailboxes flooded with.
So I'm out of this thread until there is a reasonable discussion
hap
.
I _honestly_ do not understand why there is so much trouble in simple
cooperation amongst adults.
Regards,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
ure EAPIs
> defining new metadata.
Fix that, then. And I understand that the code is already there in
both portage and pkgcore to store the cache as key-value pairs rather
than one-slot-per-key, and would be relatively trivial to add to
paludis.
Regards,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted
o get the metadata in the common case.
Does the cache format _really_ need to be extensible the extent that
we're jumping hoops to support arbitrary cache formats?
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8
a cache is for?
>> > - it heavily restricts future syntax and meaning of EAPIs
>>
>> Not by much. It's just a header.
>
>
Do we want to keep the spec so wide open that we support any format
under the Sun that we fancy? Seems like overgeneralizing to me.
Regards,
-
; performance for Paludis.
Could you please share more details on the experiment that showed this
kind of performance degradation and the numbers, if possible?
Thanks,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8
header.
> - it makes comments have meaning
Just as much as #!/bin/bash and # vim: ... do
Regards,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
e matter and take it forward.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
in a
relatively short, deterministic period of time rather than otherwise.
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
hings depend.
This is not functionality. It is the lack thereof. Making this part of
an EAPI makes it opt-in, which it shouldn't be. It is important for QA
and should be mandatory for all ebuilds.
Regards,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
that rely on the
current behaviour, we can easily implement this in a phased manner:
make it a QA notice to start with and make it default behaviour after
3-6 months or whatever time period is suitable.
BTW, do you have any examples of packages relying on non-fatal
behaviour for do* stuff? It'd
y die only
FEATURES="strict").
The bug basically seems only wanting in consensus on this matter,
which is why I'm posting this here.
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138792
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCK
he sources shows that "--with-mp"
basically lets some processing stuff run in separate threads. This is
clearly only useful on SMT/CMP/SMP machines, so I think USE=smp is
fine.
The user's complaint could be valid, though. Perhaps "smp" should be a
global USE flag.
Cheers,
--
Ar
w portage unmerge-on-blocker feature take care of this now?
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
(http://nemesis.accosted.net)
v2sw5Chw4+5ln4pr6$OFck2ma4+9u8w3+1!m?l7+9GSCKi056
e6+9i4b8/9HTAen4+5g4/8APa2Xs8r1/2p5-8 hackerkey.com
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Arun Raghavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Feedback and comments (and even brickbats ;)) on the eclass are
>> invited.
>
> * Don't install the COPYING file via the
Hello!
2008/5/24 Ali Polatel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Attached is a patch for two minor issues with the eclass. First try to
> remove py-compile only if it exists. Second, python_mod_optimize is
> ROOT aware (since recently).
Thanks for the feedback ... I've checked in your pa
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
