Re: [gentoo-dev] Help offered - Portage tree

Robin H. Johnson wrote: - "What I am asking Gentoo Foundation is, let me fix them" Apply to be a developer, then you can fix them. I don't personally have any opinion (positive or negative) about Sabayon, but a former coworker of mine was a big fan. Addendum, the Foundation cannot do anything a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 slotting or not?

Raúl Porcel wrote: Xulrunner-1.9 is a big change, and the apps using it won't work until they are fixed. So this needs to be decided, i've been working on slotting xulrunner, and i'm ready to put it in the tree. However i'd like to see what developers(since they will be the ones who will have t

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 slotting or not?

On 17:12 Sat 15 Mar , Raúl Porcel wrote: > That's what i would like to hear opinions about. Should we slot it, or > should we not slot it and wait until all the apps are fixed? Favoring upstream's approach seems to better fit the Gentoo way. If upstream doesn't intend it to be slotted, neith

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: sci-electronics/lard

It finally happened. Last version was 5 years ago or so. From package.mask: # Denis Dupeyron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (15 Mar 2008) # Masked for removal in 30 days. Requires Tcl 8.3 which # isn't in the tree anymore. See bugs 172356 and 173467. sci-electronics/lard -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org maili

[gentoo-dev] [LAST RITES] mit-scheme

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Binary package mit-scheme has been masked and will be removed from the tree. Our overlay has source mit-scheme-c ebuilds which is the C compiler backend. Marijn - -- Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bugzilla enhancements wrt AT work

Torsten Rehn a écrit : On Saturday 15 March 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote: Just curious, who would be the default assignee for those 2 new components? I don't think anything should be changed here. Unpriviledged users automatically assign to bug-wranglers, everyone else goes for the target packag

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bugzilla enhancements wrt AT work

On Saturday 15 March 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote: > Just curious, who would be the default assignee for those 2 new components? I don't think anything should be changed here. Unpriviledged users automatically assign to bug-wranglers, everyone else goes for the target packages' maintainer. Do you se

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-power/nut: ChangeLog nut-2.2.1.ebuild

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 00:20:31 -0700 Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 06:03 Sun 09 Mar , Rajiv Aaron Manglani (rajiv) wrote: > > 1.1 sys-power/nut/nut-2.2.1.ebuild > > > > file : > > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/sys-power/nut/nut-2.2.1.ebuild?r

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 slotting or not?

Raúl Porcel a écrit : So, firefox-3, seamonkey-2, thunderbird-3 and other mozilla products will be using xulrunner-1.9, which is the codebase the mozilla products are based on. In fact, everytime you emerge any of those apps, you're compiling xulrunner, which takes 90% of the time to build. The

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bugzilla enhancements wrt AT work

Torsten Rehn a écrit : Two weeks ago, dirtyepic suggested making some modifications to how ATs and developers interact using Bugzilla [1]. <+jakub> scel: basically... instead of KEYWORDREQ/STABLEREQ <+jakub> create keywording and stabilization components <+jakub> and use flags accordingly there

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bugzilla enhancements wrt AT work

Saturday, 15 of March 2008 17:37:15 Torsten Rehn wrote: > Two weeks ago, dirtyepic suggested making some modifications to how ATs and > developers interact using Bugzilla [1]. > > <+jakub> scel: basically... instead of KEYWORDREQ/STABLEREQ > <+jakub> create keywording and stabilization components >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 slotting or not?

Hi, > Since the pkgconfig files for xulrunner-1.9 are renamed to avoid > collisions with current xulrunner-1.8. In general I dont think that is a good idea to do that as you said we'll have to patch all the rev deps of xulrunner. More importantly we'll have to carry on those patches forever becau

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Bugzilla enhancements wrt AT work

Two weeks ago, dirtyepic suggested making some modifications to how ATs and developers interact using Bugzilla [1]. <+jakub> scel: basically... instead of KEYWORDREQ/STABLEREQ <+jakub> create keywording and stabilization components <+jakub> and use flags accordingly there <+jakub> bugzilla alread

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 slotting or not?

Okay, so here's the thing: Firefox 3 will be released probably some time during this year, as you probably know, they released a few days ago beta4 and beta5 will be out probably at the start of the next month or so. I started doing ebuilds for net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 and www-client/mozilla-fire

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Help offered - Portage tree

Fabio Erculiani napsal(a): I'll try to file a huge bug on all the broken RDEPENDs I'll found. I'll try to find a free slot during the end of the next week for the hunting. No, please don't. One bug per category is acceptable, no way I'm going to CC 150 maintainers on such monster bug and watch

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in sys-power/nut: ChangeLog nut-2.2.1.ebuild

On 06:03 Sun 09 Mar , Rajiv Aaron Manglani (rajiv) wrote: > 1.1 sys-power/nut/nut-2.2.1.ebuild > > file : > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/sys-power/nut/nut-2.2.1.ebuild?rev=1.1&view=markup > plain: > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/sys-power