On 06/17/2011 09:53 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday, June 17, 2011 14:34:35 Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> I'm sorry, but honestly, did you have a point in there somewhere?
>
> i gathered that he had a specific case where he found a removal entry in the
> ChangeLog kept people from chasing their
Excerpts from Hans de Graaff's message of Sat Jun 18 08:16:25 +0200 2011:
> Stanislav asked me to review. I'm also including the list since other
> people may also be interested how to handle ruby ebuilds.
>
> On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 22:04 +, Stanislav Ochotnicky (sochotnicky)
> wrote:
> > socho
On 18.06.2011 09:16, Hans de Graaff wrote:
>
>> RDEPEND="dev-ruby/rcsparse >=dev-ruby/rbtree-0.3.0-r2 dev-vcs/git"
>
> The ruby-ng eclasses frob RDEPEND, so you should always add to it, e.g.
>
> RDEPEND="${RDEPEND} dev-vcs/git"
>
This stacking is automatically handled by the package manager.
On 17.06.2011 20:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday, June 17, 2011 12:25:21 Torsten Veller wrote:
>> * justin :
>>> Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>>
>> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
>> not write to the filesystem".
>>
>> Is it allowed to write
On 18/06/11 13:18, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 17.06.2011 20:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Friday, June 17, 2011 12:25:21 Torsten Veller wrote:
>>> * justin :
Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>>>
>>> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
>>> not write to
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2011, justin wrote:
> On 18/06/11 13:18, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> That approach would still write to the filesystem. With the current
>> text the PM is probably allowed to set the sandbox so that writing
>> is anywhere is denied.
> The reason why it would be beneficial to use
On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:18:28 +0200
justin wrote:
> The reason why it would be beneficial to use is the pkg_pretend phase
> is simply that the checks would run at the beginning of a emerge and
> it would fail directly instead somewhere in the middle. For a single
> package it won't change much but
# Eray Aslan (18 Jun 2011)
# No upstream. Does not work correctly. Bugs #275764 #370171.
# Several working alternatives, including dovecot, cyrus, mailutils.
# Removal in 30 days
net-mail/teapop
--
Eray Aslan
Developer, Gentoo Linux eras gentoo.org
pgp6NX2fNKZ50.pgp
Description: PGP sig
# Eray Aslan (18 Jun 2011)
# Dead upstream. Lots of alternatives including mailx,
# nail, ssmtp, postfix...
# Removal in 30 days
mail-client/smtpclient
--
Eray Aslan
Developer, Gentoo Linux eras gentoo.org
pgp2bU8jMnaZR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 18/06/11 15:08, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:18:28 +0200
> justin wrote:
>> The reason why it would be beneficial to use is the pkg_pretend phase
>> is simply that the checks would run at the beginning of a emerge and
>> it would fail directly instead somewhere in the middle.
So here are the last changes. Everything is in pkg_setup now, because of
the dependency problem found by Ciaran.
eclass/fortran-2.eclass | 28 ++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/fortran-2.eclass b/eclass/fortran-2.eclass
index
sec-policy/selinux-policykit masked for removal, bug #371441
There are no package depending on it.
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 8040 5A4D 8709 21B1 1A88 33CE 979C AF40 D045 5535
GnuPG ID : D0455535
On Saturday, June 18, 2011 10:55:50 justin wrote:
> + tc-export F77
> + tc-export FC
tc-export F77 FC
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Saturday, June 18, 2011 02:26:56 Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> OK, right, so where are we heading with this? sys-apps/sed is in system
> and it's bound to be >=sed-4 and we're sticking with it. So are we
> going to get rid of it in all the ebuilds that still set that dep?
for the packages that just d
14 matches
Mail list logo
