[gentoo-dev] gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

i dont plan on suggesting any gcc-4.2 version for stable. arches of course are free to determine if gcc-4.2 works better for them than gcc-4.1 and thus move to stable. gcc-4.3 seems to be standing up well. since the major gcc-ebuild-specific issues seem to be resolved now, i'll probably do a

[gentoo-dev] glibc-2.7 stabilization

some heads up here glibc-2.7 has sat in ~arch for much longer than i would have liked. the only real issue holding it back is nscd. i never use this thing myself, but on some arches (like ppc), it's known to eat your cpu like a dirty C-globbler (where C is short for CPU). on other arches,

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

On 02:57 Thu 10 Apr , Mike Frysinger wrote: gcc-4.3 seems to be standing up well. since the major gcc-ebuild-specific issues seem to be resolved now, i'll probably do a sweep of bugs to see if there's any patches i'm missing (if you guys know of a bug that should be addressed

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for April

On 03:03 Wed 09 Apr , Mike Frysinger wrote: This is your one-day friendly reminder ! The monthly Gentoo Council meeting is tomorrow in #gentoo-council on irc.freenode.net. See the channel topic for the exact time (but it's probably 2000 UTC). If you're supposed to show up, please show

Re: [gentoo-dev] VDB access

Ciaran McCreesh a écrit : The following things access VDB by hand: * gnome2-utils.eclass. Will be fixed once a portage with proper env saving goes stable, which isn't too far off. Bug 155993. Quick follow-up on that for everyone. The eclass has been modified not to access VDB anymore yet

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

On Thursday 10 April 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote: On 02:57 Thu 10 Apr , Mike Frysinger wrote: gcc-4.3 seems to be standing up well. since the major gcc-ebuild-specific issues seem to be resolved now, i'll probably do a sweep of bugs to see if there's any patches i'm missing (if you

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

On Thursday 10 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote: Also, you'll have to provide a URL to said change. i havent seen a patch for it in my random driftings on the interweb. -mike I was just researching the issue, so had this handy: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg00417.html -- /PA

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

Donnie Berkholz wrote: Presuming you're adding the direction-flag patch to 4.3.0 so it doesn't break people on a kernel earlier than 2.6.25? gentoo-sources-2.6.24-r4 has that patch, at least when looking at the changelog. Or is it just for compile-time borkage and not for the direction flag

[gentoo-dev] Re: glibc-2.7 stabilization

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 03:02:17 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: some heads up here glibc-2.7 has sat in ~arch for much longer than i would have liked. the only real issue holding it back is nscd. i never use this thing myself, but on some arches (like ppc), it's known to eat your cpu like a

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.7 stabilization

Hey Mike: Mike Frysinger escribió: some heads up here glibc-2.7 has sat in ~arch for much longer than i would have liked. the only real issue holding it back is nscd. In alpha we still have a bastard called 205099[1]. We need to track down the real problem there and fix it before we can

[gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 02:57:11 -0400: then move on to the gcc 4.3 tracker bug (#198121). once this gets below a certain critical mass (i wont know what the critical mass is until it's been de-attained), then we'll be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for April

I win, as always *g* -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 46: Allow upstream tags in metadata.xml

Santiago M. Mola wrote: The GLEP should be updated. Motivation section does not seem to justify the changes. IMO Meatoo [1] (and its hipothetical rewrite using Doapspace [2]) would be the right tool to detect version bumps. Maybe metadata.xml should contain a Freshmeat or DOAP entry so meatoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

On Thursday 10 April 2008, Jan Kundrát wrote: Donnie Berkholz wrote: Presuming you're adding the direction-flag patch to 4.3.0 so it doesn't break people on a kernel earlier than 2.6.25? gentoo-sources-2.6.24-r4 has that patch, at least when looking at the changelog. Or is it just for

[gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 10 April 2008

Hi all, Here is the summary from today's council meeting. The complete log will show up at http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ shortly. Thanks, Donnie Quick summary = GLEP 46 (Allow upstream tags in metadata.xml): Approved Slacker arches: Vapier's proposal is going out tonight.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 10 April 2008

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 01:28:43AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:21:20 -0700 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having OhLoh would be nice, but over the course of the last year, they've found that their system is not really capable of handling the scope of the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 10 April 2008

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:37:31 -0700 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's why I setup them up with the ability to rsync it, and they never got back to me on that, nor used it ever. Hrm, curious. They seem interested and alive currently. Perhaps it's worth another shot... -- Ciaran

Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 10 April 2008

On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 01:41:09AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:37:31 -0700 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That's why I setup them up with the ability to rsync it, and they never got back to me on that, nor used it ever. Hrm, curious. They seem interested

[gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 27

Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:35:36 -0400: How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP 27? Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?