On 14 August 2015 at 05:37, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> Uh, the point of the 'pretend' bit in the name is that it *is* run when
> you do emerge -p.
It is strange really.
It does them *after* prompting "yes" with --ask
Whats the point of that?
Granted they are very slow for me now with the KDE5 s
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 14/08/15 06:43 PM, Johannes Huber wrote:
> >
> >
> > Am 08/15/15 um 00:19 schrieb Andrew Savchenko:
> >> Hi,
> >
> >> While I have no objections about EAPI 4 deprecation (except
> >
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 15:29:21 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> This might already be covered in one of the other e-mail threads, but I've
> been
> super-busy as of late and just recently ran 'emerge --sync' on my main dev box
> for the first time after the git migration. I just synced my main dev bo
Joshua Kinard wrote:
> This might already be covered in one of the other e-mail threads, but I've
> been
> super-busy as of late and just recently ran 'emerge --sync' on my main dev box
> for the first time after the git migration. I just synced my main dev box
> again, ~10 hours after the last s
This might already be covered in one of the other e-mail threads, but I've been
super-busy as of late and just recently ran 'emerge --sync' on my main dev box
for the first time after the git migration. I just synced my main dev box
again, ~10 hours after the last sync, but it looks like the 'Mani
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> $ git ls-tree HEAD README
> 100644 blob 08ae16956b8944da2fef75fee892dcba457cf4f0README
> $
>
> $ (stat --printf='blob %s\0' README; cat README) | sha1sum
> 08ae16956b8944da2fef75fee892dcba457cf4f0 -
> $
>
> This is so simple to generate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/08/15 02:48 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 08:12:42 +0200 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
>> On 8/15/15 3:16 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>> Secondly, though, conversion to EAPI5 is not actually
>>> trivial, there are a couple of th
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 7:24 AM, hasufell wrote:
>
> No one has proven that git is cryptographically insecure. Everyone
> claiming that probably refers to
> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/10/when_will_we_se.html and
> the fact that we don't sign blob objects.
>
> While that is somethi
On 15 Aug 2015 20:45, "Peter Stuge" wrote:
>
> Hi and happy Git days! :)
>
>
> Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > It expands to the hash of the blob of that file; and from that, you can
> > identify which commits the blob exists in.
>
> $ git ls-tree HEAD README
> 100644 blob 08ae16956b8944da2fef75fee892
Hi and happy Git days! :)
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> It expands to the hash of the blob of that file; and from that, you can
> identify which commits the blob exists in.
$ git ls-tree HEAD README
100644 blob 08ae16956b8944da2fef75fee892dcba457cf4f0README
$
$ (stat --printf='blob %s\0' READM
On 08/15/2015 11:56 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 11:02:19 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> OK, if manifests are that important, why not generate full manifest
> during repoman commit? If we do not tamper with $Id$, the only file
> outside of this manifest will be ChangeL
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
>
> I remember some discussions about ideas to make the tree more for core
> packages and overlay for specialized stuff. How did we decided finally
> what is better: having specialized stuff in overlays, or moving it to
> the tree when it i
On 15 August 2015 at 21:56, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> And even with current thin-manifest
> workflow there may be conflict if they touch the same files.
They'll be single-line conflicts though, which will mean assuming
different developers touch different files, git will be able to
trivially mer
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 11:02:19 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > OK, if manifests are that important, why not generate full manifest
> > > > during repoman commit? If we do not tamper with $Id$, the only file
> > > > outside of this manifest will be ChangeLog generated during rsync
> > > > propagatio
Hi all,
I've started to work on moving of sci-physics/herwig++ into the tree
after discussion with Andrew (see below). It takes with it a bunch of
packages:
* sci-physics/rivet
* sci-physics/yoda
* sci-physics/thepeg
* sci-physics/looptools
I remember some discussions about ideas to make the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Am 08/15/15 um 07:35 schrieb Michał Górny:
>
> This is a cheap hack, not a conversion. Proper conversion to a new
> EAPI is about using the new EAPI features. Not marking it 'done',
> and pretending there's nothing more to do.
>
Yeah you are ri
Dnia 2015-08-15, o godz. 11:51:01
Andrew Savchenko napisał(a):
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 09:53:37 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2015-08-15, o godz. 10:50:02
> > Andrew Savchenko napisał(a):
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 10:54:57 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 14
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 09:53:37 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2015-08-15, o godz. 10:50:02
> Andrew Savchenko napisał(a):
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 10:54:57 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
> > > wrote:
> > > > They will be Open
Dnia 2015-08-15, o godz. 10:50:02
Andrew Savchenko napisał(a):
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 10:54:57 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
> > wrote:
> > > They will be OpenPGP signed by a releng key during thickening and
> > > portage will auto-
Hi,
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 10:54:57 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
> wrote:
> > They will be OpenPGP signed by a releng key during thickening and
> > portage will auto-verify it using gkeys once things are in place. As
> > such checksum for ebuild
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/14/2015 01:04 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 19:19:10 +0800 Ben de Groot wrote:
>> I vote for a simple
>>
>> Bug: 333531
>
> +1
>
> Of course, for external bugs (e.g. in other projects) full URI
> should be used.
>
>
>
Dnia 2015-08-15, o godz. 09:06:48
Ulrich Mueller napisał(a):
> > On Sat, 15 Aug 2015, Paweł Hajdan, wrote:
>
> > Nothing seems to prevent doing the mass conversion first,
> > deprecating EAPI 4, and then having a second, slower pass to make
> > sure the ebuilds are using EAPI 5 as they shoul
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/14/2015 03:05 PM, Johannes Huber wrote:
> Hello Gentoos Penguins,
>
> if we want to attract more contributors we should consider to have
> one supported EAPI (latest). EAPI 4 is the last not marked as
> deprecated (< EAPI 5). The move in ebuil
> On Sat, 15 Aug 2015, Paweł Hajdan, wrote:
> Nothing seems to prevent doing the mass conversion first,
> deprecating EAPI 4, and then having a second, slower pass to make
> sure the ebuilds are using EAPI 5 as they should be. One way might
> be to add a "TODO" comment during mass conversion,
24 matches
Mail list logo
