On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:08:07 -0700
Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Does this (and previous similar threads) suggestion means that
> > portage will not support GLEP 54? Or how it'll be related with said
> > glep?
>
> It seems like GLEP 54 is intended to fill a similar gap in the
> ebuild
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Сбт, 23/08/2008 в 13:39 -0700, Zac Medico пишет:
>> Please consider a PROPERTIES=live value that, when set in an ebuild,
>> will serve to indicate that the ebuild will use some form of "live"
>> source code that may vary each ti
В Пнд, 25/08/2008 в 11:40 -0700, Zac Medico пишет:
> Peter Volkov wrote:
> > It's good feature for overlays, but I think we should avoid this in
> > portage tree as having same information in two places can be avoided in
> > this case: it's better and not so hard to write tool which will keyword
>
В Сбт, 23/08/2008 в 13:39 -0700, Zac Medico пишет:
> Please consider a PROPERTIES=live value that, when set in an ebuild,
> will serve to indicate that the ebuild will use some form of "live"
> source code that may vary each time that the package is installed.
Does this (and previous similar threa
В Чтв, 21/08/2008 в 19:26 -0700, Alec Warner пишет:
> src_prepare is a logically distinct action (maybe if we called it
> src_patch it would be clearer?)
We are not only patching sources there but modify them by other means
too (like sed or find .. rm \{\};). So src_prepare is the name which
bette
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
(#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
G
