Ryan Hill wrote:
It's best to keep the number of external packages needed to build the
toolchain to a bare minimum. Anything that isn't a hard requirement should
be a USE flag. We also need to be able to bootstrap without a C++ compiler,
which one of graphite's dependencies (PPL) needs.
Am Mittwoch, den 12.08.2009, 23:55 -0600 schrieb Ryan Hill:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:56 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:55:22 -0600
Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's a seperate thing that needs EAPI control. You'll need to
propose it for EAPI 4 if you want that.
Why is that (seriously curious, not disagreeing)? Portage has
supported this for quite a while now. Does the
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccreesh at googlemail.com writes:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal scarabeus at gentoo.org wrote:
Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage already
handles it right).
That's a seperate thing that needs EAPI control. You'll need
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:50:26 + (UTC)
Mark Bateman coul...@soon.com wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal scarabeus at gentoo.org wrote:
Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage
already handles it right).
That's a seperate thing that needs
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Tiziano Müllerdev-z...@gentoo.org wrote:
To avoid collision with the current package.mask I'd prefer
package.mask.d/ for the directory. Also makes the transition easy since
we can generate package.mask out of the files in package.mask.d/.
I completely agree
On Thursday 13 of August 2009 12:35:43 Tiziano Müller wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 12.08.2009, 23:55 -0600 schrieb Ryan Hill:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:56 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
An ebuild for manServer is in the pipeline, currently waiting for the
next reply from upstream.
manServer ebuild here, new 1.08 release from upstream
http://git.goodpoint.de/?p=overlay-sping.git;a=tree;f=app-text/manserver
Sebastian
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccreesh at googlemail.com writes:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:50:26 + (UTC)
Mark Bateman couldbe at soon.com wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal scarabeus at gentoo.org wrote:
Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:32:56 + (UTC)
Mark Bateman coul...@soon.com wrote:
It is not the business of PMS to enforce undocumented features that
Portage supports only by accident and that aren't used in the tree.
PMS doesn't depict just what portage should do, just what ebuild's in
the
Markos Chandras wrote:
Now, it is my time to say goodbye ( but not forever ) . I am *forced* to join
the greek army from 16/8/2009 until May 2010. So I wont be active during this
period. When I come back, I expect a more shiny Gentoo which will provide
great experiences to our users.
So
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccreesh at googlemail.com writes:
PMS documents what ebuilds may or may not rely upon from the package
manager. PMS, like the Portage document, says that package.mask is a
file.
And main tree ebuild can rely on that. There are no directory-based
package.mask in the
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:06:04 + (UTC)
Mark Bateman coul...@soon.com wrote:
And it shouldn't be until it's gone through the proper process to
become a documented, controlled feature rather than an accident
people are exploiting.
Seriously, this isn't difficult to do. I get the
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 12:50:26 + (UTC)
Mark Bateman coul...@soon.com wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal scarabeus at gentoo.org wrote:
Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage
already handles it right).
That's a
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:22:16 +0100
Steven J Long sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
PMS accurately reflects the Portage documentation and the commit
message that introduced the feature -- it's purely for use
in /etc/portage/, which is beyond the scope of PMS.
If it's pre-EAPI it's part of
On Wednesday 12 August 2009 13:13:27 Samuli Suominen wrote:
Do we still need it? It appears to be very unmaintained. And if there's
3rd party tools that still need it, I wouldn't count them qualifying.
Suggestion: cvs remove -f
it's been deprecated for pretty much ever (it was known to be
profiles/obsolete will be gone inside ~24 hours from posting this mail
thanks, Samuli
This week is my last for SoC this summer, so unless I do something
groundbreaking tomorrow, this will be my last status report. I was
hoping to be able to show off a working server with Ingenue running on
it by this time, but I'm still waiting for all the difficulties with
getting a root-access
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:27:26 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Ryan Hill wrote:
It's best to keep the number of external packages needed to build the
toolchain to a bare minimum. Anything that isn't a hard requirement should
be a USE flag. We also need to be able to
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:29:04 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:55:22 -0600
Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's a seperate thing that needs EAPI control. You'll need to
propose it for EAPI 4 if you want that.
Why is that
20 matches
Mail list logo
