What do YOU think about removing these from tree?
gtk-engines/gtk-engines-0.12.ebuild:DEPEND="=x11-libs/gtk+-1.2*
gtk-engines-begtk/gtk-engines-begtk-1.0.1-r2.ebuild:DEPEND="=x11-libs/gtk+-1.2*"
gtk-engines-cleanice/gtk-engines-cleanice-0.8.5.ebuild:DEPEND="=x11-libs/gtk+-1.2*"
gtk-engines-cleanic
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 13:43:10 +0200
Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What do YOU think about removing these from tree?
>
> gtk-engines/gtk-engines-0.12.ebuild:DEPEND="=x11-libs/gtk+-1.2*
> gtk-engines-begtk/gtk-engines-begtk-1.0.1-r2.ebuild:DEPEND="=x11-libs/gtk+-1.2*"
[snip]
As long
maillog: 25/02/2007-13:53:18(+0100): Andrej Kacian types
> On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 13:43:10 +0200
> Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What do YOU think about removing these from tree?
> >
> > gtk-engines/gtk-engines-0.12.ebuild:DEPEND="=x11-libs/gtk+-1.2*
> > gtk-engines-begtk/gtk-engi
maillog: 25/02/2007-22:38:54(+0900): Георги Георгиев types
> maillog: 25/02/2007-13:53:18(+0100): Andrej Kacian types
> > On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 13:43:10 +0200
> > Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > What do YOU think about removing these from tree?
> > >
> > > gtk-engines/gtk-engin
Steve Long wrote:
> Stephen P. Becker wrote:
>> All of that said, how about we clear up all of the misinformation about
>> how arch keywording really works, how deps get wrongly dropped, and then
>> explain why mips has generally fallen behind. This isn't an excuse,
>> but is merely a statement of
Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> And I'd be fond of having all the -ffast-math filtering ripped out of the
> tree
> as well.
Please include -ftree-vectorize and -ftree-loop-linear along with that.
I've yet to see a GCC release where they work correctly, including 4.2.
--
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> What do YOU think about removing these from tree?
*I* think it's a great idea, but *I* may be heavily medicated at the moment.
Seriously, IMHO the less we have depending on GTK+-1 the better. Others
will disagree loudly.
> Related picture,
> http://www.acc.umu.se/~zqad/
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 09:37:33 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Seriously, IMHO the less we have depending on GTK+-1 the better. Others
> will disagree loudly.
It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes should
go last, along with gtk1 itself.
Gtk1 is alrea
Last riting..
# Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (24 Feb 2007)
# Has no stable keywords and is not ported to Xfce 4.4.
# Masked for removal.
xfce-extra/xfce4-websearch
- drac
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 04:13 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> | and Gianelloni for the infrastructure.
>>
>> And what on earth do infrastructure have to do with a package manager
>> specification?
>
> Especially considering that I am not an infrastructure guy. I'll be
>
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:51:51 +
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Like I said, tho, I'm happy if the council is. Although I'm starting to
> worry at the increasingly poisonous atmosphere, and that devs are leaving.
> Flameeyes was on the council, no? It concerns me that this atmosphere is
Andrej Kacian wrote:
> As for the poisonous atmosphere - I don't know, I feel very good among the
> developers, and am still enjoying working on the tree just like on the day
> I joined. Don't let few loud flamers ruin your day.
>
Thanks for that Andrej. Makes me feel much better :)
--
gentoo-d
Andrej Kacian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:07:55 +0100:
> On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 09:37:33 -0600
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Seriously, IMHO the less we have depending on GTK+-1 the better.
>> Others will disagree loudly.
>
>
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:51:51 +
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And irrespective
> of whether bug-wranglers have much to say, I'd still want them
> involved, as they deal with the ebuild bugs. As such they could well
> have ideas or viewpoints which would help. Even if they don't, it's
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2007-02-25 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
dev-lang/tolua 2007-02-19 23:34:16 mabi
dev-lang/lua-wrapper2007-02-20 00:00:41 mabi
media-video/nvidia-freebsd 2007-0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:22:34 -0800 Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | In order to do this, selected profile specific flags should be
> | masked in the base profile and unmasked/forced in the specific
> | profiles which
Steve Long wrote:
Andrej Kacian wrote:
As for the poisonous atmosphere - I don't know, I feel very good among the
developers, and am still enjoying working on the tree just like on the day
I joined. Don't let few loud flamers ruin your day.
Thanks for that Andrej. Makes me feel much better :)
Something is wrong with this list (there are some other removals I know
took place that do not seem to be listed).
Please ignore while I trace why.
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 12:15:01AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
> from the
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 16:42 -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:22:34 -0800 Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > | In order to do this, selected profile specific flags should be
> > | masked in th
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2007-02-25 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
dev-lang/tolua 2007-02-19 23:34:16 mabi
dev-lang/lua-wrapper2007-02-20 00:00:41 mabi
media-video/nvidia-freebsd 2007-0
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 18:09 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Something is wrong with this list (there are some other removals I know
> took place that do not seem to be listed).
>
> Please ignore while I trace why.
DAMN YOU!!!
Heh... just kidding.
--
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strate
Andrej Kacian wrote:
> It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes should
> go last, along with gtk1 itself.
>
> Gtk1 is already ugly enough, do you want it to be even more ugly?
Point, set, and match.
--
by design, by neglect
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 09:34:32PM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 18:09 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > Something is wrong with this list (there are some other removals I know
> > took place that do not seem to be listed).
> >
> > Please ignore while I trace why.
> DAMN
most arches have bzip2/zlib in default-linux/arch/make.defaults so why not
just move it to default-linux/make.defaults
-mike
pgpFTNngzdyJf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:10:16 + (UTC)
Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keep in mind that those who have it already
> merged along with their favorite theme can keep them in overlay, so
> removing the themes from the tree simply keeps new users from merging
> something that's already on it
hal cannot install when one dependencie built with zlib USE flag..
Mike Frysinger írta:
> most arches have bzip2/zlib in default-linux/arch/make.defaults so why not
> just move it to default-linux/make.defaults
> -mike
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Tóth Csaba wrote:
> hal cannot install when one dependencie built with zlib USE flag..
>
Hal should be fixed then...
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Luca Barbato wrote:
Tóth Csaba wrote:
hal cannot install when one dependencie built with zlib USE flag..
Hal should be fixed then...
lu
We've already been arguing about this on the bug, can we please not
bring it here...
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
28 matches
Mail list logo
