Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 21:20 -0500, Dale wrote: > Ben wrote: > > On 6 May 2012 08:29, Dale wrote: > >> I mentioned this once a long time ago. We expect things to stay the > >> same unless we do something to change them. If things change without us > >> doing the change, we tend to freak out a bit

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

Ben wrote: > On 6 May 2012 08:29, Dale wrote: >> I mentioned this once a long time ago. We expect things to stay the >> same unless we do something to change them. If things change without us >> doing the change, we tend to freak out a bit. We don't need any >> freaking out. > > Sounds to me l

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On 6 May 2012 08:29, Dale wrote: > I mentioned this once a long time ago.  We expect things to stay the > same unless we do something to change them.  If things change without us > doing the change, we tend to freak out a bit.  We don't need any > freaking out. Sounds to me like it would be a goo

Re: [gentoo-dev] remove cups from releases/make.defaults ?

On 6 May 2012 04:45, hasufell wrote: > # grep ^USE /usr/portage/profiles/releases/make.defaults > USE="acl cups gdbm gpm nptl nptlonly sysfs unicode" > > This is used by "/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0" for > example, so I have "cups" in default NON-DESKTOP profile like it was a >

Re: [gentoo-dev] add global useflag: webkit

On 6 May 2012 08:34, hasufell wrote: > # grep :webkit use.local.desc | wc -l > 33 > > I would vote to make this a global useflag: > > webkit - Adds support for the webkit library/module > IIRC this was already voted on ~2 years ago (before I retired). It's just waiting for someone to implement it

[gentoo-dev] add global useflag: webkit

# grep :webkit use.local.desc | wc -l 33 I would vote to make this a global useflag: webkit - Adds support for the webkit library/module

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

Michael Weber wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 05/05/2012 09:55 PM, Dale wrote: >> Not to mention, you add the possibility that the user may miss the >> change since they are not expecting it. I would expect it when I >> was changing profiles but not so much just

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Dale wrote: > Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) wrote: >> I don't like this change much. There are valid use cases for an ldap use >> flag in the desktop profile that could break easily with this change. >> There are valid use cases for every USE flag in portage, otherwise

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/05/2012 08:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On Sat, 5 May 2012 20:40:47 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" > wrote: > >> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with >> the help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

2012/5/5 Michael Weber : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 05/05/2012 09:55 PM, Dale wrote: >> Not to mention, you add the possibility that the user may miss the >> change since they are not expecting it.  I would expect it when I >> was changing profiles but not so much ju

[gentoo-dev] remove cups from releases/make.defaults ?

# grep ^USE /usr/portage/profiles/releases/make.defaults USE="acl cups gdbm gpm nptl nptlonly sysfs unicode" This is used by "/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0" for example, so I have "cups" in default NON-DESKTOP profile like it was a mandatory useflag. Is it? I don't even have a pr

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/05/2012 09:55 PM, Dale wrote: > Not to mention, you add the possibility that the user may miss the > change since they are not expecting it. I would expect it when I > was changing profiles but not so much just coming out of the blue. We sho

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) wrote: > > On May 5, 2012 3:14 PM, "Markos Chandras" > wrote: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA512 >> >> On 05/05/2012 06:10 PM, Alec Warner wrote: >> > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov >> > mailto:maksbo...@gen

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On May 5, 2012 3:14 PM, "Markos Chandras" wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 05/05/2012 06:10 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov > > wrote: > >> Hi, I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected > >> 'default/linux/x86/10.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] About dropping webapps-unmaintained alias

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 04/21/2012 11:51 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > It's simply pointing to maintainer-needed and no bug is assigned to > it. If a webapp package is orphan, it should go to > maintainer-needed directly I think > > The same for webapps-request, that is a li

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

On 05/05/12 21:01, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 05/05/12 14:40, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: >> >> Hiya, >> >> there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the help of >> an >> eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some of them into the >> portage tree. Now we hav

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 05/05/2012 06:10 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov > wrote: >> Hi, I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected >> 'default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop' profile and noticed ldap among >> default USE flags. Wh

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

On Sat, 5 May 2012 20:40:47 +0200 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the > help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some > of them into the portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put > them. > > Suggestion: n

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

On 05/05/12 14:40, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Hiya, > > there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the help of an > eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some of them into the > portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put them. > > Suggestion: new c

Re: [gentoo-dev] cmake-utils.eclass: set default of CMAKE_VERBOSE=1

Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012, 18:30:10 schrieb hasufell: > # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: CMAKE_VERBOSE > # @DESCRIPTION: > # Set to enable verbose messages during compilation. > > By default this is deactivated which is inconvenient imo and results in > pastes having minimum information. > I have to tell users e

[gentoo-dev] New category for (libre)office extensions: office-ext ?

Hiya, there's a growing culture of libreoffice extensions, and (with the help of an eclass prepared by scarabeus) it would be nice to get some of them into the portage tree. Now we have to decide where to put them. Suggestion: new category office-ext What do you think? Cheers, Andreas --

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On Saturday 05 May 2012 13:10:10 Alec Warner wrote: > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov wrote: > > I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected > > 'default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop' profile and noticed ldap among > > default USE flags. Why is that needed? I suppose there are more use

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual/pkgconfig to support lighter alternatives

On 05/05/2012 09:02 PM, Jeff Horelick wrote: I didn't mention this last night (probably because I was EXTREMELY tired), but the entire gentoo-x86 tree has been converted to the virtual (Y!!! *kermitflail*). As long as you don't use any overlays, you should now be able to switch your pkgco

Re: [gentoo-dev] new virtual/pkgconfig to support lighter alternatives

I didn't mention this last night (probably because I was EXTREMELY tired), but the entire gentoo-x86 tree has been converted to the virtual (Y!!! *kermitflail*). As long as you don't use any overlays, you should now be able to switch your pkgconfig implementation to pkgconf[pkg-config] or p

Re: [gentoo-dev] Chromium bundled code

On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 05:35:22PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 4 May 2012 18:02:05 -0700 > Greg KH wrote: > > And what are you going to do when dbus moves into the kernel itself > > (hint, it will be there soon)? > > Why stop at dbus? Why isn't libxml2 in the kernel yet? Because kern

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

2012/5/5 Alec Warner : > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov wrote: >> Hi, >> I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected >> 'default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop' profile and noticed ldap among >> default USE flags. Why is that needed? I suppose there are more users >> w/o ldap auth on d

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On 05/05/2012 08:10 PM, Alec Warner wrote: On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov wrote: Hi, I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected 'default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop' profile and noticed ldap among default USE flags. Why is that needed? I suppose there are more users w/o ldap aut

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Maxim Koltsov wrote: > Hi, > I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected > 'default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop' profile and noticed ldap among > default USE flags. Why is that needed? I suppose there are more users > w/o ldap auth on desktops than with it. > So my

Re: [gentoo-dev] Chromium bundled code

On Fri, 4 May 2012 18:02:05 -0700 Greg KH wrote: > And what are you going to do when dbus moves into the kernel itself > (hint, it will be there soon)? Why stop at dbus? Why isn't libxml2 in the kernel yet? -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Possible lastrite of sys-fs/rar2fs (waiting for upstream reaction)

On 05/05/2012 07:20 PM, Matt Turner wrote: On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: # Samuli Suominen (05 May 2012) # Broken with unrar-4.2.1 wrt upstream ticket of: # http://code.google.com/p/rar2fs/issues/detail?id=10 # Either waiting for fixed release, or the package will # be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Chromium bundled code

On 05/04/12 21:33, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 09:27:05PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: >> On 05/04/12 20:58, Greg KH wrote: >>> Why do we really care about non-udev and non-dbus users? It's only >>> going to get worse and worse if people don't want to use these core, >>> base libaries of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Possible lastrite of sys-fs/rar2fs (waiting for upstream reaction)

On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:35 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > # Samuli Suominen (05 May 2012) > # Broken with unrar-4.2.1 wrt upstream ticket of: > # http://code.google.com/p/rar2fs/issues/detail?id=10 > # Either waiting for fixed release, or the package will > # be removed in 30 days > <=sys-fs/rar2f

[gentoo-dev] RFC: remove ldap from desktop profiles use flags

Hi, I just installed fresh system on my pc, selected 'default/linux/x86/10.0/desktop' profile and noticed ldap among default USE flags. Why is that needed? I suppose there are more users w/o ldap auth on desktops than with it. So my proposal is to remove it from profiles/targets/desktop/make.defaul

[gentoo-dev] Possible lastrite of sys-fs/rar2fs (waiting for upstream reaction)

# Samuli Suominen (05 May 2012) # Broken with unrar-4.2.1 wrt upstream ticket of: # http://code.google.com/p/rar2fs/issues/detail?id=10 # Either waiting for fixed release, or the package will # be removed in 30 days <=sys-fs/rar2fs-1.15.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] cmake-utils.eclass: set default of CMAKE_VERBOSE=1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/04/2012 09:37 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Johannes Huber > wrote: >> Am Freitag, 4. Mai 2012, 14:41:42 schrieb Mike Gilbert: >>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:29 PM, hasufell >>> wrote: I think that as an a

Re: [gentoo-dev] cmake-utils.eclass: set default of CMAKE_VERBOSE=1

On 05/05/2012 12:49 AM, Kacper Kowalik wrote: > On 04.05.2012 18:30, hasufell wrote: >> # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: CMAKE_VERBOSE >> # @DESCRIPTION: >> # Set to enable verbose messages during compilation. >> >> By default this is deactivated which is inconvenient imo and results in >> pastes having minimum

Re: [gentoo-dev] cmake-utils.eclass: set default of CMAKE_VERBOSE=1

El sáb, 05-05-2012 a las 09:49 +0200, Kacper Kowalik escribió: > On 04.05.2012 18:30, hasufell wrote: > > # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: CMAKE_VERBOSE > > # @DESCRIPTION: > > # Set to enable verbose messages during compilation. > > > > By default this is deactivated which is inconvenient imo and results in >

Re: [gentoo-dev] cmake-utils.eclass: set default of CMAKE_VERBOSE=1

On 04.05.2012 18:30, hasufell wrote: > # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: CMAKE_VERBOSE > # @DESCRIPTION: > # Set to enable verbose messages during compilation. > > By default this is deactivated which is inconvenient imo and results in > pastes having minimum information. > I have to tell users every time to re