On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 15:44 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> bonjour is Apple specific branding for zeroconf. This is another case
> that needs to be changed.
>
> zeroconf/avahi/howl/bonjour/mdnsresponder all need to be condensed.
>
I agree. Let's just have zeroconf.
Daniel
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Tue, 04 Nov 2008 14:30:15 -0500:
> In general, it makes sense to me to have an unversioned one if there is
> no version dependency - i.e. if xfce.eclass would likely work for future
> ones (like "xfce5"). I'm not sure
Daniel Pielmeier wrote:
> Doug Goldstein schrieb am 04.11.2008 18:11:
>
>> Hey all,
>>
>> A few ebuilds treat things differently with regard to this situation and
>> it really needs to get rectified.
>>
>> net-misc/ntp
>> zeroconf? ( || ( net-dns/avahi net-misc/mDNSResponder ) )
>>
>> net-pr
Christoph Mende wrote:
> Well, the desktop is usually called Xfce4, plus that'd match gnome2...
> and more or less kde4
In general, it makes sense to me to have an unversioned one if there is no
version dependency - i.e. if xfce.eclass would likely work for future ones
(like "xfce5"). I'm not sur
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 13:15:25 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:43:55 -0500
> Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Christoph Mende wrote:
> > > Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
> > > would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:43:55 -0500
> Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Christoph Mende wrote:
>>> Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
>>> would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists.
>> Since the new eclass is not version specific, how about
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 13:43:55 -0500
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christoph Mende wrote:
> > Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
> > would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists.
>
> Since the new eclass is not version specific, how about simply
> "xfce.eclass
Christoph Mende wrote:
> Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
> would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists.
Since the new eclass is not version specific, how about simply "xfce.eclass"?
-Joe
Petteri Räty wrote:
> The names of eclasses aren't shown to users and I think figuring out a
> new name is a minor inconvenience so I would just go with the safe route.
I disagree: we should use care in choosing names, since these names will be
around for a long time. Using an ugly name might not
Zac Medico wrote:
> Christoph Mende wrote:
>> Hi,
>
>> I'm currently working on a new eclass for Xfce4 that, as opposed to the
>> previous ones (xfce42.eclass, xfce44.eclass), is supposed to be used
>> for all versions. Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
>> would be xfce4.eclass, ex
Doug Goldstein schrieb am 04.11.2008 18:11:
> Hey all,
>
> A few ebuilds treat things differently with regard to this situation and
> it really needs to get rectified.
>
> net-misc/ntp
> zeroconf? ( || ( net-dns/avahi net-misc/mDNSResponder ) )
>
> net-print/cups
> zeroconf? ( !avahi? (
Hey all,
A few ebuilds treat things differently with regard to this situation and
it really needs to get rectified.
net-misc/ntp
zeroconf? ( || ( net-dns/avahi net-misc/mDNSResponder ) )
net-print/cups
zeroconf? ( !avahi? ( net-misc/mDNSResponder ) )
avahi? ( net-dns/avahi )
kde-bas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christoph Mende wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently working on a new eclass for Xfce4 that, as opposed to the
> previous ones (xfce42.eclass, xfce44.eclass), is supposed to be used
> for all versions. Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
> wou
Le mardi 04 novembre 2008 à 12:11 -0500, Doug Goldstein a écrit :
> Hey all,
>
> A few ebuilds treat things differently with regard to this situation
> and
> it really needs to get rectified.
[snip]
> Maybe we should clean the whole thing up and do like net-misc/ntp does
> it. Thoughts?
since I'm
Hi,
I'm currently working on a new eclass for Xfce4 that, as opposed to the
previous ones (xfce42.eclass, xfce44.eclass), is supposed to be used
for all versions. Now the most logical name for an eclass like that
would be xfce4.eclass, except that eclass already exists. It seems like
it was used f
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Someone remind me again why we have the kerberos USE flag enabled by
> default? Especially after a long time of kerberos not having a
> maintainer (thanks mueli for joining the Gentoo club and maintaining it
> now). Our current maintainer is working his butt off to get it up
Hi,
> media-libs/aalib eradicator
added video herd there
> media-libs/liboggzzaheerm
and sound here
Alexis.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
17 matches
Mail list logo
