-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/27/2012 02:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:44:47 -0400
> "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
>
>> I would REALLY like to cut down on things like what I saw when I
>> upgraded today:
>>
>> * Messages for package
>> app-emula
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:44:47 -0400
"Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
> I would REALLY like to cut down on things like what I saw when I
> upgraded today:
>
> * Messages for package
> app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20120520:
You are looking for QA_FLAGS_IGNORED.
--
Best regards,
Mich
On 20 July 2012 06:28, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Sascha Cunz wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason for not using at least en_US.UTF-8 as a "sane"
>> default value?
>
> Because there's no one-size-fits-all locale, but it is specific to
> every system so the user must configure it?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/23/2012 01:44 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il 23/07/2012 10:30, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina ha scritto:
>> Those are two very valid reasons why we can't add these to the profiles,
>> but do you have any suggestions on how we can get more tha
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
[ snip ]
> 9) Otherwise, at very minimum, they're failing the "build udev pretty
> much the same as before"
./configure
make
make install
You fail to see the matter from their POV. They don't care (that much)
about building, be
Canek Peláez Valdés posted on Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:08:35 -0500 as
excerpted:
> Just to clarify, udev/systemd never promised "to make the component
> parts buildable separately". They promised:
>
> "we will be supporting this for a long time since it is a necessity to
> make initrds (which lack sys
On 7/26/2012 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibility
On 07/26/2012 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Implementing it wouldn't necessarily be hard - just create a tmpfs
> under /var/tmp/portage, unshare off a new mount namespace, and
> read-only bind-mount everything needed from the root filesystem
> (including /var/tmp/portage/...), and chroot into it.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Peter Alfredsen
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:27:41 -0400
>> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I think a consolidated systemd/udev package is the best
>>> way to go here.
>>
>> A consolidated package
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:27:41 -0400
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think a consolidated systemd/udev package is the best
>> way to go here.
>
> A consolidated package means that:
>
> - every change made by udev developers would have
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> (Really, this observation is more about simply making the information
> available; distcc could consume that information if someone chose to
> do the work to add that functionality.)
Well, I'm not sure how to get the info out of the internals
On 07/26/12 14:26, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibi
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a
I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibility build? That is, the
build would be run in a
# Samuli Suominen (26 Jul 2012)
# We are in process of dropping most of GTK+-2.x Ubuntu
# Ayatana libraries from tree and unfortunately glipper
# has hardcoded dependency on libappindicator's Python
# GTK+-2.x bindings
# Removal in 30 days
x11-misc/glipper
> > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > I'd add it, it is a gpl incompatible opensource license.
>
> No problem to add it. But IMHO the usage restriction in section 3
> makes it non-free:
>
> "You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only
> for purposes that a
Kent Fredric schrieb:
> firmware-video/ati-firmware
> firmware-video/ati
>
> and any category name with "Firmware" in it, will result in lots of
> redundant names exposed to users/deps if the package /also/ has
> firmware in the name.
Indeed, but this redundancy already exists in tree, e.g. dev-l
# Tiziano Müller (24 Jul 2012)
# Now part of net-fs/cifs-utils & unmaintained by upstream
# Security bug #308067 and bugs #427702, #232608, #247809,
# #258409, #265183, #337691, #342783, #279074
# Removal in 30 days
net-fs/mount-cifs
On 26 July 2012 19:32, Michał Górny wrote:
> But you are aware that this is *upstream* naming?
>
> Similarly, ati-drivers (which is not upstream naming :P)
> and nvidia-drivers don't follow the suite.
I wasn't aware of that, but thats beside the point I was trying to
make. Its just a mechanism th
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Luca Barbato wrote:
> I'd add it, it is a gpl incompatible opensource license.
No problem to add it. But IMHO the usage restriction in section 3
makes it non-free:
"You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only
for purposes that are authorized b
On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 06:03:53 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn posted on Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:58:30
> +0200 as excerpted:
>
> > Kent Fredric schrieb:
> >> On 23 July 2012 08:48, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
> >> wrote:
> >>> I do see some advantage of the
22 matches
Mail list logo
