Guys,
Can we not just have a developer wide vote or something? This instance
clearly not going to resole itself.
Sometimes it seems that endless mailing list threads are the Gentoo way,
its a surprise we get anything done!
Ian
On Mon, 2013-02-11 at 23:30 +0100, Michael Weber wrote:
> On 02/11/2013 09:39 PM, Hans de Graaff wrote:
> > # Hans de Graaff (11 Feb 2013)
>
> What about using your gentoo email address? One mapping less, please.
Too much autopilot, it seems. Fixed.
Hans
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> I will try another full build tomorrow, and if the issue persists, try to
> uncover the culprit (naturally, my build script is somewhat more
> complex than emerge -upvDN @world I tried above, so hopefully the
> issue is reproducible).
Not r
Am Montag, 11. Februar 2013, 23:14:38 schrieb Michał Górny:
>
> What are your thoughts?
Same as Diego I like the general idea, but an even more generic framework
might make sense. Say test dbus session, say setting up some test file
structure, ...
Oh, and one more thing... please before you co
Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Users will never be satisfied. But I guess you agree that API
> > compatibility will certainly avoid extra problems for users.
>
> It is not related to users,
I was trying to come back on topic. :)
> is related to me being called as swine a traitor and having death
> thr
On 11/02/13 22:33, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Luca Barbato wrote:
>> May I point you that ~10 people were the majority of what was FFmpeg,
>> thus 10 people were enough to demote democratically the so called Leader
>> and that guy got the name from Fabrice as his personal decision?
>
> There was probabl
I'd say, "Go for it!"
But on the other hand I wonder if it might make sense to have
something more generic, so that one only has to call something in a
way such as
virtualx_setup
run_tests --foo
virtualx_cleanup
The reason why I'm wondering this is that we need some more "virtual
environments" f
On 02/11/2013 09:39 PM, Hans de Graaff wrote:
> # Hans de Graaff (11 Feb 2013)
What about using your gentoo email address? One mapping less, please.
--
Michael Weber
Gentoo Developer
web: https://xmw.de/
mailto: Michael Weber
---
gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass b/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
index 0da3066..096c37a 100644
--- a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
+++ b/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ Xmake() {
Instead of ewarn "QA: ...
---
gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass | 24 +---
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass b/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
index 47116fd..0da3066 100644
--- a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
+++ b/gx86/eclass/virtu
The new syntax seems simple enough that we can think of deprecating all
those short-hand forms.
---
gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass | 14 --
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass b/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
index f576335..9d5045d 10064
---
gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass | 7 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass b/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
index 096c37a..f576335 100644
--- a/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
+++ b/gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass
@@ -172,12 +172,13 @@ virtualmake()
Let's get this straight:
VIRTUALX_COMMAND="foo" virtualmake --bar --baz
is just ugly. Instead, introduce a function which can be used as:
virtualx foo --bar -baz
---
gx86/eclass/virtualx.eclass | 45 -
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+),
Hello, fellow developers,
The current virtualx.eclass API is a bit insane. It seems a bit like
stacking of a few next APIs, mostly designed to quickly run 'make
check', then extended to general functions.
For example running a function 'run_tests' with parameter '--foo' would
look like:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:04:43 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> Your whole email is derailing a bit from discussing the code at hand
> and it is going deep down on the people, I'd rather not get there
> since it gets totally unrelated the question at hand.
I'm not sure if you read my reply, but it was
Luca Barbato wrote:
> May I point you that ~10 people were the majority of what was FFmpeg,
> thus 10 people were enough to demote democratically the so called Leader
> and that guy got the name from Fabrice as his personal decision?
There was probably a reason for Fabrice to do that, and majority
On 02/11/2013 12:53 PM, James Cloos wrote:
>> "AB" == Alexis Ballier writes:
>
> AB> Well, if we have to advertise the usage of this option that basically
> AB> disables subslot rebuilds, it only means we are doing something
> AB> seriously wrong with subslots :=)
>
> So far, I've found the
On 2013-02-11, at 3:53 PM, James Cloos wrote:
>> "AB" == Alexis Ballier writes:
>
> AB> Well, if we have to advertise the usage of this option that basically
> AB> disables subslot rebuilds, it only means we are doing something
> AB> seriously wrong with subslots :=)
>
> So far, I've fou
Your whole email is derailing a bit from discussing the code at hand and
it is going deep down on the people, I'd rather not get there since it
gets totally unrelated the question at hand.
On 11/02/13 14:49, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> All of this because ~10 people cannot work together, well, really,
> "AB" == Alexis Ballier writes:
AB> Well, if we have to advertise the usage of this option that basically
AB> disables subslot rebuilds, it only means we are doing something
AB> seriously wrong with subslots :=)
So far, I've found the sub slots to be more of a pain in the ass than
helpful.
Alexis - thanks a lot for the awesome response!
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> 'those who are right'
(Just a note that I am in no way invested in libav/ffmpeg, I merely
speak from experience with another fork.)
> However, as I said, maybe with an incorrect tone, I do not think
> libav ignoring what ha
# Hans de Graaff (11 Feb 2013)
# No longer supported upstream even for security bugs.
# Port your application to another version of Rails.
# The Rails 3.0 version in the tree has security issues
# and no new 3.0 versions will be released anymore.
dev-ruby/rails:3.0
dev-ruby/railties:3.0
dev-ruby/a
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:22:16 +0100
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Alexis,
>
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > All of this because ~10 people cannot work together, well, really,
> > thank you :)
>
> Do you have experience from being in a similar situation? You are
> being quite judgemental.
>
> There are absol
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> My guess is that there were one or more ebuilds that inappropriately
> specified dev-libs/libusb:0 instead of virtual/libusb:0, and they have
> since been fixed.
I did the full build yesterday, with most recent stage3 and portage
snapshot. All
Zac Medico wrote:
> My guess is that there were one or more ebuilds that inappropriately
> specified dev-libs/libusb:0 instead of virtual/libusb:0, and they have
> since been fixed.
I believe they were all changed some months ago, but it's of course still
possible if either the snapshot was old or
On 02/11/2013 08:54 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> it's because of what Maxim already said: it's not an LTR/RTL issue.
>
> Do you have an idea about what the issue is?
My guess is that there were one or more ebuilds that inappropriately
specified dev-libs/libusb:0 instead o
On 11/02/2013 17:54, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Do you have an idea about what the issue is?
No, but I'm pretty certain that it's not that, because the preference is
and has been for a very long time LTR.
Which happens to be one of the things the quizzes are there to ensure
people know.
--
Diego Elio
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> it's because of what Maxim already said: it's not an LTR/RTL issue.
Do you have an idea about what the issue is?
//Peter
On 11/02/2013 17:44, Peter Stuge wrote:
> If my guess is correct then you are really way too eager to
> misunderstand what people intend to transmit, given a less than
> unambiguous message.
No, it's because of what Maxim already said: it's not an LTR/RTL issue.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > Can you try swapping the two in the virtual?
>
> Or not.
I guess that you assumed that I suggested to test this in-tree, so
I guess I should clarify that I would expect it to be tested in
PORTDIR_OVERLAY.
If my guess is correct then you are really way too eager to
m
Alexis,
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> All of this because ~10 people cannot work together, well, really,
> thank you :)
Do you have experience from being in a similar situation? You are
being quite judgemental.
There are absolutely situations where people so different that
cooperation simply can't wor
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> If you can reproduce the problem, then
> please create a debug logs as follows, and attach it to a bug on
> bugs.gentoo.org:
Can't reproduce with stage3 + emerge -upvDN. :/
I will look out for this issue in full system builds in the future.
--
On 02/11/2013 07:42 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>>> net-libs/libpcap-1.3.0-r1 (canusb ? virtual/libusb)
>>
>> This one has no slotted dependency. Does that matter? In any case it
>> doesn't seem completely correct, since the two APIs are not
>> c
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> net-libs/libpcap-1.3.0-r1 (canusb ? virtual/libusb)
>
> This one has no slotted dependency. Does that matter? In any case it
> doesn't seem completely correct, since the two APIs are not
> compatible.
It doesn't matter in this case, because c
On 02/11/2013 06:18 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> Any idea on what's going on? BFS instead of DFS search when satisfying "||"?
It searches from left to right. If you can reproduce the problem, then
please create a debug logs as follows, and attach it to a bug on
bugs.gentoo.org:
emerge [args] --
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 09/02/13 07:52 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Feb 2013 23:38:35 +1100 Michael Palimaka
> wrote:
>
>> I even noticed some maintainers adding subslots dependencies on
>> libraries that do not yet define subslots. This too seems
>> reasona
On 11/02/2013 16:17, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> > Any idea on what's going on? BFS instead of DFS search when
>> > satisfying "||"?
> Seems a good explanation.. Can you try swapping the two in the virtual?
Or not.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> * These packages depend on libusb:
One stands out:
> app-crypt/ccid-1.4.8 (usb ? virtual/libusb:1)
> app-crypt/gnupg-2.0.19 (usb ? virtual/libusb:0)
> dev-libs/openobex-1.5 (usb ? virtual/libusb:0)
> media-libs/libmtp-1.1.5 (virtual/libusb:1)
> net-libs/libpcap-1.3.0-r1 (
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/11/2013 04:03 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 11/02/13 05:27, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> I, as another user, prefer not to have a whole bunch of firmware
>> installed if I only want one or two of them.
> +1. Also licences. It's a mess. Not suggest
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/10/2013 11:27 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> I, as a user, prefer not to have to hunt for firmware for devices
>> supported vy the kernel. I would either install all of them or
>> filter out the firmwares for devices I am unlikel
Hi, virtual/libusb:0 has:
RDEPEND="|| ( >=dev-libs/libusb-compat-0.1.4
>=dev-libs/libusb-0.1.12-r7:0 >=sys-freebsd/freebsd-lib-8.0[usb] )"
However, after building a system from stage3, I still ended with
dev-libs/libusb:0 instead of dev-libs/libusb-compat (whereas stage3
has no libusb at all):
#
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:25:36 +0100
Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 11/02/13 03:01, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > Sorry, I was away this week end...
>
> Not a problem, I should be reachable anytime today.
>
Will ping you.
> > This is only because libav people do not care at all about what
> > FFmpeg defi
On 11/02/13 03:01, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> Sorry, I was away this week end...
Not a problem, I should be reachable anytime today.
> This is only because libav people do not care at all about what FFmpeg
> defines, while FFmpeg seems to care more about its consumers and users
> by trying to provid
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/02/13 05:27, Peter Stuge wrote:
> I, as another user, prefer not to have a whole bunch of firmware
> installed if I only want one or two of them.
+1. Also licences. It's a mess. Not suggesting that *I* have the
magic-unicorn-land-perfect solut
44 matches
Mail list logo
