[gentoo-dev] About my confusing ~sparc-fbsd mail.

2009-10-06 Thread Samuli Suominen
Things have changed a bit, thanks to Monkeh I've got a access to a one. So does aballier. So we are trying to give it a bit of life support. I'm working on getting python rekeyworded today. Hold off the keyword dropping for now. Thanks, Samuli

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GNOME 2.26 upgrade

2009-10-06 Thread Mart Raudsepp
On T, 2009-10-06 at 02:11 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > Hello, > > See attached news item for consideration. > Suggestions on how to improve it, including the text section, very > welcome. Attached is a tweaked version with wording fixes from dabbott and author as me instead of team, as I underst

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GNOME 2.26 upgrade

2009-10-06 Thread Rémi Cardona
Le 06/10/2009 13:02, Mart Raudsepp a écrit : On T, 2009-10-06 at 02:11 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: Hello, See attached news item for consideration. Suggestions on how to improve it, including the text section, very welcome. Attached is a tweaked version with wording fixes from dabbott and aut

[gentoo-dev] (no subject)

2009-10-06 Thread Andrew D Kirch
unsubscribe

[gentoo-dev] RFC: Add RUBY_TARGETS to USE_EXPAND

2009-10-06 Thread Alex Legler
Hey, I would like to propose the addition of a new USE_EXPAND variable. The Ruby team is currently working on a new version of ruby.eclass with proper support for packages installed for multiple versions of ruby. RUBY_TARGETS contains a list of ruby implementations and versions to install a pack

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

2009-10-06 Thread David Leverton
On Monday 05 October 2009 23:20:10 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > You probably will see some remarks about "commit it, and let > everyone else deal with the mess for years to come" being the > long-established Gentoo tradition, however. Not to mention "accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being a tro

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in xfce-base/xfconf: ChangeLog xfconf-4.6.1.ebuild

2009-10-06 Thread Samuli Suominen
David Leverton wrote: > On Monday 05 October 2009 23:20:10 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >> You probably will see some remarks about "commit it, and let >> everyone else deal with the mess for years to come" being the >> long-established Gentoo tradition, however. > > Not to mention "accuse anyone who di

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Add RUBY_TARGETS to USE_EXPAND

2009-10-06 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi, Alex Legler : > RUBY_TARGETS contains a list of ruby implementations and versions to > install a package for, like this: Python has to do the same for 2.x and 3 versions...wouldn't it be nice to have the same solution for both languages? V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project h

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Add RUBY_TARGETS to USE_EXPAND

2009-10-06 Thread Alex Legler
On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 22:19:25 +0200, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > Hi, > > Alex Legler : > > RUBY_TARGETS contains a list of ruby implementations and versions to > > install a package for, like this: > > Python has to do the same for 2.x and 3 versions...wouldn't it be > nice to have the same so

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GNOME 2.26 upgrade

2009-10-06 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Rémi Cardona wrote: > "not handle the desktop." => "not handle the desktop's background image" > I thought it handled the icons on the desktop as well? -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan GNOME+Mozilla Team, Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GNOME 2.26 upgrade

2009-10-06 Thread Mart Raudsepp
On K, 2009-10-07 at 06:24 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Rémi Cardona wrote: > > "not handle the desktop." => "not handle the desktop's background image" > > > > I thought it handled the icons on the desktop as well? yeah, we cleared that on IRC and the e-mail w

[gentoo-dev] RFC: USE=qa-test

2009-10-06 Thread Ryan Hill
Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful for developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be foisted on users. Dbus' case is extreme, as it builds-in functions that are useful for unit testing, but result in an insecure and unstable package (I just "fixed"