On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 10:20:01PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sat, 16 Jul 2022, William Hubbs wrote:
> > The only question is, is there a way to reliably tell whether or not
> > we are in the main tree?
>
> An eclass has no legitimate way to find out in which repository it
The new variable JAVA_AUTOMATIC_MODULE_NAME can be defined in the
ebuild. Its value will be transferred to the MANIFEST.MF of the jar
file.
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/857468
Signed-off-by: Volkmar W. Pogatzki
---
eclass/java-pkg-simple.eclass | 12
1 file changed, 12
> On Sat, 16 Jul 2022, William Hubbs wrote:
> I could force this in the eclass with the following flow if I know how
> to tell if the ebuild inheriting it is in the main tree or not:
> # in_main_tree is a place holder for a test to see if the ebuld running
> # this is in the tree
> if
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 06:46:40PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 09:31:35PM +0300, Arthur Zamarin wrote:
> > I want to give another option. Both ways are allowed by eclass, but by
> > QA policy (or some other decision), it is prohibited to use EGO_SUM in
> > main
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 08:42:39PM +0200, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I noticed that we have many people that, after received a bug report, ask for
> what the
> reported 'qa notice' means.
>
> Sometimes there is a tracker and people can take an hint from the resolved
> bugs but
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 09:31:35PM +0300, Arthur Zamarin wrote:
> I want to give another option. Both ways are allowed by eclass, but by
> QA policy (or some other decision), it is prohibited to use EGO_SUM in
> main ::gentoo tree.
>
> As a result, overlays and ::guru can use the EGO_SUM or dist
Hello all,
I noticed that we have many people that, after received a bug report, ask for
what the
reported 'qa notice' means.
Sometimes there is a tracker and people can take an hint from the resolved bugs
but
when there aren't a lot of info I feel they are a bit lost.
Today, by pure
On 16/07/2022 20.51, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 02:58:04PM +0300, Joonas Niilola wrote:
>> On 16.7.2022 14.24, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>>>
>>
>> ++ this sounds most sensible. This is also how I've understood your
>> proposal.
>
> Remember that with EGO_SUM all of the bloated
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 02:58:04PM +0300, Joonas Niilola wrote:
> On 16.7.2022 14.24, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> >
> > That reads as if you wrote it under the assumption that we can only
> > either use dependency tarballs or use EGO_SUM. At the same time, I have
> > not seen an argument why we can
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/832377
Signed-off-by: Sam James
---
eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass | 9 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass b/eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass
index 5e6269b21b17..00786c2f74bb 100644
--- a/eclass/flag-o-matic.eclass
+++
On 16.7.2022 14.24, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>
> That reads as if you wrote it under the assumption that we can only
> either use dependency tarballs or use EGO_SUM. At the same time, I have
> not seen an argument why we can not simply do *both*.
>
> EGO_SUM has numerous advantages over dependency
On 15/07/2022 23.34, William Hubbs wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 01:43:19AM +0200, Zoltan Puskas wrote:
In summary, IMHO the EGO_SUM way of handling of go packages has more
benefits than drawbacks compared to the vendor tarballs.
EGO_SUM can cause portage to break; that is the primary reason
12 matches
Mail list logo
