-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Joshua Jackson wrote:
In the oldest version of the package (as all these were), I don't
see much point in the change. They will be removed within a
fairly short amount of time.
Fairly short meaning what, 6 months? A lot of
Joshua Jackson wrote:
To quote one of the ebuild-quiz questions: You wish to make a change
to an ebuild, but you checked the ChangeLogs and metadata.xml and it
appears to be maintained by someone else. How should you proceed?
A general response that is obtained from the documentation source
The last change: 401 up to 406. Yes, it actually got worse. This is
caused by artifacts fixed by the recent portage 2.1 revision bump,
because I know some apps were fixed.
Progress graph:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/broken_modular/broken_modular_progress.png
Latest list:
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 13:49, Joshua Jackson wrote:
Mark Loeser halcy0n at gentoo.org writes:
Donnie Berkholz spyderous at gentoo.org said:
Jason Stubbs wrote:
The patch now has the debugging output and x11-base/xorg-x11 check
removed.
Excellent. Works perfectly. Since
On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:46:28 +0900 Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Monday 30 January 2006 16:43, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 06:17:36 +0100 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| | Also, as
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:31:55 +0900 Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| 1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
| values, and documenting them all and keeping the list up to date
| would be extremely difficult.
|
| More precisely, how should they be documented
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Heya,
I noticed the logrotate USE flag thread recently and did a bit of reading on
the problem (ie read all the previous threads) as well as touching on the
whole cron USE flag thoughts as well, and it struck me that it is really odd
that this
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:11:49 + Benjamin Smee (strerror)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| While I understand various developers concerns about cluttering /etc
| (especially embedded), I don't see why this should stop the policy of
| writting ebuilds that work and have expected tools around them.
|
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 06:31, Jason Stubbs wrote:
On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
values, and documenting them all and keeping the list up to date would
be extremely difficult.
More precisely,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
heya,
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:31, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
See, you're not really taking into account the cost of sticking files
in /etc. For packages where an etc entry is low cost, it's already
done.
What is the cost you are referring to
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:03:38 + Benjamin Smee (strerror)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:31, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| See, you're not really taking into account the cost of sticking
| files in /etc. For packages where an etc entry is low cost, it's
| already done.
|
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
heya,
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| What is the cost you are referring to specifically? I think I know
| but I'd like a specific definition.
1. Management. For example, handling etc-update.
That is surely a cost
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + Benjamin Smee (strerror)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| | What is the cost you are referring to specifically? I think I
| | know but I'd like a specific definition.
|
| 1. Management. For example,
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps being
fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it against
whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving something to
stable that you know is
Mark Loeser wrote:
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps
being
fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it
against
whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving something to
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:41:36 -0800 Donnie Berkholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Mark Loeser wrote:
| We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are
| touching. For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around,
| where the newer ebuilds are fixed, but old ones are not. We
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 15:47 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Not really. For some packages, cron files must always be installed for
proper operation. For some packages, cron files are strictly optional
extras for features that many users will not want. For many it's
somewhere in between. For
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Basically, if the package *requires* something to function, such as a
cron script, then it should install it unconditionally. If it does not,
then it shouldn't install it. Having to change USE to get a stupid
cron/logrotate file is definitely not the best option. Why
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + Benjamin Smee (strerror)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| For packages in the second group, not using a USE flag is silly.
|
| I take it you are agreeing we should have a USE
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 12:15:00PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
I finally came up with an idea for this that satisfies my desire to not
recompile the package to get e.g. a logrotate file. Have the flag
control whether it's installed to /etc or to /usr/share/doc.
That's actually a pretty good
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:15:00 -0800 Donnie Berkholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| I finally came up with an idea for this that satisfies my desire to
| not recompile the package to get e.g. a logrotate file. Have the flag
| control whether it's installed to /etc or to /usr/share/doc.
|
| Thoughts?
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I'd prefer either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc personally. But
yeah, that's a nice solution.
You mean either /usr/share/doc or /etc/ and /usr/share/doc?
./Brix
--
Henrik Brix Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Metadistribution
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + Benjamin Smee (strerror)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| For packages in the second group, not using a USE flag is silly.
|
| I take it you are agreeing
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:03:46 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| I'd prefer either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc personally. But
| yeah, that's a nice solution.
|
| You mean either /usr/share/doc or /etc/ and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all.
Markus has been contributing to gentoo through bugzilla and bugdays for
a few months and have now finally joined the ranks of official Gentoo
developers. Markus is going to help with netmon related ebuilds.
Markus tells us about himself:
I'm a 23 year old
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 11:17:49PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:03:46 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| I'd prefer either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc personally. But
| yeah,
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps
being
fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it
against
whatever bug is requesting
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 22:39, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 06:31, Jason Stubbs wrote:
On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
values, and documenting them all and keeping the list
Jason Stubbs wrote:
Is
having INPUT_DEVICES and the like following the same scheme
(ie, input_devices.desc) acceptable?
As long as I can still get the pretty output with -vp. =)
Thanks,
Donnie
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
maillog: 31/01/2006-12:15:00(-0800): Donnie Berkholz types
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + Benjamin Smee (strerror)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| For packages in the second group, not using a USE flag is
Jason Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are
touching.
For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around, where the newer ebuilds
are fixed, but old ones are not. We
31 matches
Mail list logo
