On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 01:11:45 -0700
> Brian Harring wrote:
>
>> A compatibility hack that stacks them is strongly advisable;
>> something akin to the following:
>>
>> Literally, we do the following:
>> inherit() {
>> if eapi blah; then
>>
On 12 September 2012 08:02, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Gentoo's bash-completion breaks when make.conf is in /etc/portage. Bug
> filed back in early July and there's a simple enough patch, but
> app-shells/gentoo-bashcomp has only the shell-tools herd, no dedicated
> maintainer, and 13
Zac Medico posted on Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:29:36 -0700 as excerpted:
> I would recommend to simply use /etc/make.conf alone until the legacy
> tools that you use catch up. We have to change the default location in
> the stages in order to expose the bugs so they can get fixed.
I posted to the porta
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 06:36:46PM -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/06/2012 02:50 PM, Micha?? G??rny wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 09:49:13 -0700
> > Brian Harring wrote:
> >
> >> One additional thought- re: the scenarios where we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/06/2012 02:50 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 09:49:13 -0700
> Brian Harring wrote:
>
>> One additional thought- re: the scenarios where we don't fetch to an
>> intermediate location, then transfer that contents into ${WORKDIR},
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:01 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> I can agree that a server would probably want a static configuration,
> but all work stations do not use gnome, kde, etc.
>
Most do not run unix, but at work I can't think of any servers that
are using static configurations. They might be
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 02:43:08PM -0400, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 20:01 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > On 9/10/12 11:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:26:10PM -0400, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > >> On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 09:48 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
>
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:07 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 09/11/2012 09:54 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> At the ebuild level, certainly, but that's one of the reasons for
>> EJOBS in the first place, so that it can be overridden consistently
>> within a phase, if necessary for the ebuild (regardles
On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 20:01 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 9/10/12 11:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:26:10PM -0400, Olivier Crête wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 09:48 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> In researching this program, I have found that it and ifplugd, whi
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 00:23:11 + (UTC)
"Mike Frysinger (vapier)" wrote:
> vapier 12/08/28 00:23:11
>
> Modified: ChangeLog profiles.desc
> Log:
> add new s390x profile #345421
[...]
> @@ -152,7 +153,7 @@
> x86 default/linux/x86/10.0/server
> stable
> # G
On 9/10/12 11:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:26:10PM -0400, Olivier Crête wrote:
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 09:48 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
In researching this program, I have found that it and ifplugd, which is
the alternative, have been unmaintained for years. Also Debian
On 09/11/2012 09:54 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 11/09/12 12:43 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 09/11/2012 09:36 AM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Dunno where to place this request, but if we go for something
>>> like EJOBS could we also make it phase specific? So compile,
>>> install and test could
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/09/12 12:43 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 09/11/2012 09:36 AM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Dunno where to place this request, but if we go for something
>> like EJOBS could we also make it phase specific? So compile,
>> install and test could have
On 09/11/2012 09:36 AM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
> Dunno where to place this request, but if we go for something like EJOBS
> could we also make it phase specific?
> So compile, install and test could have a different number of jobs running.
> Possibly three different variables that override a prede
Il 04/09/2012 19:15, Zac Medico ha scritto:
On 09/04/2012 04:00 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 05:20:02PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote
This approach is fine imo, although I'd *potentially* look at adding a
magic $PROC_COUNT var that is the # of cpu threads on the system;
either t
On 09/10/2012 08:29 PM, Gregory M. Turner wrote:
> On 9/9/2012 6:34 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 09/09/2012 05:59 PM, Duncan wrote:
>>> To your knowlege (IOW have you tested) having /etc/make.conf either a
>>> symlink to /etc/portage/make.conf or a simple one-line
>>> "source /etc/portage/make.conf"
On Thu, 6 Sep 2012 01:11:45 -0700
Brian Harring wrote:
> A compatibility hack that stacks them is strongly advisable;
> something akin to the following:
>
> Literally, we do the following:
> inherit() {
> if eapi blah; then
> local DEPEND PDEPEND RDEPEND
>
> else
>
> fi
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/09/12 04:05 PM, David Leverton wrote:
> 4) dhcpcd: not sure when it was introduced, but current dhcpcd can
> detect when the link goes up and down, and request/renew its lease
> when it comes up. The only wrinkle that I can see here is that,
18 matches
Mail list logo
