On 10.6.2014 5.31, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2014 18:16:02 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>
>> Beginning with GCC 4.8.3, Stack Smashing Protection (SSP) will be
>> enabled by default.[..]
>
> .. on supported architectures.
>
>
> Right?
>
I would rather make news items architecture spec
Hi everyone,
when doing a fresh installation I noticed that during I get to see many
old news items. There used to be a problem with Portage so no news items
could be removed. I think that has now been fixed for years so we
should be able to do this without problems. How about we start by
cleaning
On 20.6.2013 16.07, Matthew Thode wrote:
> On 06/20/2013 07:49 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 20.6.2013 14.01, Matthew Thode wrote:
>>> On 06/20/2013 03:39 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
>>>> The final outcome I would love to see is that everybody eventually
&g
On 20.6.2013 14.01, Matthew Thode wrote:
> On 06/20/2013 03:39 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
>> The final outcome I would love to see is that everybody eventually
>> graduates from kindergarten :-)
>> And perhaps introduce a "culture-fit" score in the recruiting,
>> mentoring process.
>>
> As an emplo
On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates
> for January.
>
> I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the
> same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to
> keep the sta
On 24.11.2012 23.12, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> # Pacho Ramos (24 Nov 2012)
> # Doesn't build against recent kernels (#247898), all its supported
> # devices are not supported by latest kernels. Removal in a month.
> net-wireless/linux-wlan-ng-modules
> net-wireless/linux-wlan-ng-utils
> net-wireles
On 19.11.2012 19.02, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 07:41:54AM -0500, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>> Thank you for these responses because they did help me understand
>> copyright/left better. I appreciate your expertise in the matter
>> and would hope I can draw on it again in the future,
On 18.11.2012 6.28, Greg KH wrote:
>
> Also, you can not assign copyright to a third party, unless you have a
> copyright assignment form. Do the developers doing this work have such
> a form assigned? And in what country and state is that form valid for?
> Different countries, and states, have
On 19.11.2012 18.33, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>>> The answer appears to be that a file is the unit
>>
>> I personally consider it to be smaller; a number of lines within
>> a file, or even a single line, all depending on
On 31.10.2012 14.39, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In bug #304435[1], hwoarang suggested merging the devrel handbook[2]
> into the devmanual[3].
>
> As the project has grown, so has the amount - and dispersion - of
> development information. I believe consolidation of this information
> i
On 29.10.2012 18:15, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>
>
> Good idea to inform users.
>
> Is there a way to have this news item go away, say after a year or so?
> Every time I do a fresh install, I get hit with a couple of
> "perpetual" news items, and it is a little annoying.
>
News items were designed
On 22.5.2012 8.53, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>
>> Excuse me but the way this change was handled is a bit depressing.
>> First, the ebuilds should have been fixed to inherit eutils and then
>> remove eutils from autotools. Now, a bunch of ebuilds are broken out
>> of nowhere. I don't believe this issue
On 15.04.2012 17:12, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El dom, 15-04-2012 a las 16:02 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:59:50 +0200
>> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>
>>> I am unsure about validate_desktop_entries() utility. It's currently
>>> provided by eutils.eclass and only called by net-firewa
On 12.3.2012 1.15, William Hubbs wrote:
>>
>> How do you plan to handle notifying stable users if you go with
> I was thinking of another news item once we are ready to go stable.
>
> What do you think?
>
> William
>
We could reuse the same news item if we now release it as >= and then
releas
On 11.3.2012 23.43, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:28:19PM +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 11.3.2012 17.33, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> On 03/11/2012 04:03 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>>> The Display-If-Installed atom shows the news item to stable users
On 11.3.2012 17.33, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 03/11/2012 04:03 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> The Display-If-Installed atom shows the news item to stable users once
>> it's committed. I am not sure at what point does Portage show it when
>> the atom is >= so we might
On 11.03.2012 04:53, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 9:27 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> here is the udev 181 unmasking news item.
>>
>> If all goes well, this will be committed to the tree on 3/14 UTC.
>
> I guess this might be OK for unstable, but before this goes stable we
> really
On 21.01.2012 20:08, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 01/21/2012 05:04 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> On 1/21/12 5:45 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Markos Chandras
>>> wrote:
# Markos Chandras (21 Jan 2012) # Package
renamed to media-sound/musique #
http
On 3.1.2012 19.51, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
>
> [2] http://dev.gentoo.org/~swift/docs/previews/hb-portage-advanced.xml
>
> The discussion however is if it is okay to document these things there or
> not. Some of the features are considered to be too "fragile" to be broadly
> documented (at least in a
On 18.12.2011 19:13, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 12/18/11 6:02 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> There are parallel computing aspects in libbash for metadata generation,
>> data structures in AST building for bash and it's quite low level.
>
> By the way, I'v
On 14.12.2011 13:06, Gaurav Saxena wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am interested in doing my final year computer scence project on
> gentoo. I would be having a duration of six months to work on the
> project. Could you please suggest me some good project ideas that would
> be helpful to me as well as gen
On 04.12.2011 22:35, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> Hi guys 'n gals
>
> obligatory tl;dr:
> Please check your package below this list and see if it (the package) has
> a proper DEPEND and RDEPEND on the listed sec-policy/selinux-
> package(s)
>
The list would be easier to read if it was sorted. Al
On 03.11.2011 17:30, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/user.eclass?r1=1.8&r2=1.9
> -mike
Less than a day is quite a short time for people to comment. Also it
would be better to include the diff in the original email.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP di
On 27.10.2011 2.40, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i can't see any ebuild/eclass using egethome, egetshell,
> is-login-disabled from portability.eclass. anyone have a reason for
> keeping these before i punt them ?
> -mike
>
Breaking overlays. Isn't the standing policy still to not break
backwards comp
On 29.10.2011 12.39, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
>
> If the upstream is dead I have no clear idea what to do, but maybe
> infra could set-up something download.gentoo.org where we could keep
> all the files with their sums and gpg sign from us gentoo devs to
> ensure their validity.
>
The files should
On 28.10.2011 2.50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 01:47, Ryan Hill wrote:
>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:03:12 +0530 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>>> So, I honestly see no reason why toolchain should not start using EAPI 2.
>>
>> I await your patch to toolchain.eclass. :P
>
> i wouldn't bo
On 8.9.2011 16.16, Markos Chandras wrote:
>
>>> (Consider my refusal to reply any more messages in this thread as
>>> an polite attempt of avoiding escalation and flame.)
>
>> Consider my email as a friendly and polite request to please change
>> your ChangeLog behaviour from now on.
>
>
> The
On 1.9.2011 17.12, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 14:44 Thu 01 Sep , Petteri Räty wrote:
>> One thing to note is that we should get eqawarn into the next EAPI.
>
> Why?
>
So that it wouldn't fall back on einfo where not available.
Regards,
Petteri
On 1.9.2011 14.31, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:02:11 +0300
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>
>> On 1.9.2011 13.51, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300
>>> Petteri Räty wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1.9.2011 12.03, Mic
On 1.9.2011 13.51, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>
>> On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and start
>>> yelling
On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and start
> yelling at users merging ebuilds using outdates APIs. This often means
> users start filling bugs about outdated ebuilds requiring maintainers
> either to ignore that or start
On 21.08.2011 15:27, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 07:29:45 -0400
> "Anthony G. Basile" wrote:
>
>> OpenSuse has a nice solution. After an upgrade, it tells you that
>> there are some running binaries still linking against the old
>> libraries and asks you to run "zypper ps" to see t
On 27.07.2011 17:30, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz schrieb:
>> Eclasses still shouldn't break backwards compatibility — that hasn't
>> changed in the past 5 years, despite what a very small minority of
>> devs appears to think. This has been a huge PITA for python.eclass in
On 8.7.2011 11.55, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2011, Michał Górny wrote:
>
In [1] it is noted that the 'useq' and 'hasq' functions are
"Deprecated". If this is the case, do we think it would be
pertinent to have a repoman warning reminding people to switch to
'us
On 08.07.2011 01:21, Dane Smith wrote:
> All,
> In [1] it is noted that the 'useq' and 'hasq' functions are
> "Deprecated". If this is the case, do we think it would be pertinent to
> have a repoman warning reminding people to switch to 'use' and 'has'
> respectively?
>
Sounds good. One thing we
On 06.07.2011 22:45, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 10:17:28PM +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 06.07.2011 21:55, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> from my previous discussion, I am about to put a new virtual in the
>>> tree
On 06.07.2011 21:55, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> from my previous discussion, I am about to put a new virtual in the
> tree. Do I need to use the same ~arch/30 day wait/stabilize cycle I
> would normally use even though the default package the virtual will
> bring in is stable everywhere?
>
>
On 27.06.2011 19:00, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 17:53, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> I like the ruby approach for the reason that it doesn't require users to
>> run update scripts like python-updater.
>
> Sure, but if that means the developers now have
On 27.06.2011 15:28, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>
> So I know a bunch of people have already looked at it, and I'd like to
> know: what do you find better about the Ruby approach compared to the
> Python approach? Is it just the size of python.eclass, or are there a
> number of other issues?
>
I lik
On 19.06.2011 11:06, Hans de Graaff wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 14:14 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 18.06.2011 09:16, Hans de Graaff wrote:
>>>
>>>> RDEPEND="dev-ruby/rcsparse >=dev-ruby/rbtree-0.3.0-r2 dev-vcs/git"
>>>
>>> The
On 17.06.2011 20:18, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday, June 17, 2011 12:25:21 Torsten Veller wrote:
>> * justin :
>>> Now using the new pkg_pretend for EAPI=4
>>
>> While T is defined in all phases, PMS also says that "pkg_pretend must
>> not write to the filesystem".
>>
>> Is it allowed to write
On 18.06.2011 09:16, Hans de Graaff wrote:
>
>> RDEPEND="dev-ruby/rcsparse >=dev-ruby/rbtree-0.3.0-r2 dev-vcs/git"
>
> The ruby-ng eclasses frob RDEPEND, so you should always add to it, e.g.
>
> RDEPEND="${RDEPEND} dev-vcs/git"
>
This stacking is automatically handled by the package manager.
On 10.06.2011 18:33, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) wrote:
> * Samuli, extremist right wing parties are gaining power in your
> country, I think this is a way better reason to rebel than a stupid file.
True Finns are not right wing. The foreign media seems to always get it
wrong. They
On 10.06.2011 14:44, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 06/09/2011 03:37 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> do we need some kind of policy around membership on "special"
>> project teams. QA and Devrel are the most obvious examples, Infra might
>> be another.
>
> in my eyes we do. too much power to be unregul
On 05/15/2011 09:24 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> --
> If you are cross-compiling to a 32-bit architecture such as ARM, or if
> you are using a 32-bit architecture and have sys-devel/crossdev installed,
> please be warned that - unless you follow the advice below - your system
> m
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20110510-summary.txt
Please note that you must now update ChangeLog with each commit. For
more information please see the meeting log and the preceding mailing
list thread:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20110510.txt
http://ar
On 05/12/2011 04:55 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> Yeah I know I'm replying to my own message, but I also have another idea
> about this. Another option would be that for the next release we just
> stop parsing and use config_* but without trying to do any conversions.
>
> The disadvantage of this wou
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/misc-files/changelog/index.html
There doesn't seem to be a common opinion on what the policy for
ChangeLog entries is. See:
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_f829da2375f1ceab766a800913cc4998.xml
I propose a simple new text: "Every commit should
On 04/30/2011 11:35 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Apr 2011, Petteri Räty wrote:
>
>> Individual developers (especially QA project members) should not be
>> ignoring policies when they feel like it.
>
>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebui
On 04/30/2011 11:12 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> It no where in the link you provided mentions ChangeLog is required for
> removals. Removing an unused ebuild is not the same as making changes to
> an ebuild.
>
> We have no policy for logging removals. And that's like it should be.
>
It doesn
On 04/30/2011 10:22 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> I'd suggest having repoman force a changelog entry on ebuild removal.
>
Opened yesterday:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365361
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 04/30/2011 07:39 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> sources.gentoo.org is for that. ChangeLog is for users, and "old" is
> not useful information to them
>
> So no, I won't start cluttering up ChangeLogs and I would prefer if
> others would stop it as well
>
Individual developers (especially
On 03/24/2011 11:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> is there any reason we should allow people to commit unsigned
> Manifest's anymore ? generating/posting/enabling a gpg key is
> ridiculously easy and there's really no excuse for a dev to not have
> done this already.
>
Also submitting the quizzes
On 03/10/2011 12:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> the first GLEP is listed as Active, yet its information is out of date. it
> talks about GLEP editors and Gentoo Managers, neither of which exist anymore.
> basically, it still refers to the old management structure and not the
> Council. so rather
On 03/06/2011 02:22 PM, Christian Ruppert wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> in bugzilla-4.x they did change the "Status Workflow"[1].
>
>
> This will convert the status of all bugs using the following
> system:
>
> "REOPENED" will become "CONFIRMED" (and the "REOPENED" status will be
> removed)
We wou
On 02/26/2011 07:08 PM, Daniel Pielmeier wrote:
> 2011/2/21 Uditha Galgamuwa :
>> Hi dev,
>>I am Uditha Galgamuwa from university of moratuwa,Sri Lanka.I am
>> interested in the project idea "Rewrite java-config in C++ or python" which
>> was in last year Gsoc.As I saw this project has
On 02/15/2011 05:15 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> since Betelgeuse didn't actually commit the news item in November,
> here's my try. Slightly reworded the text, comments welcome. Otherwise I
> plan to commit this on Friday.
>
Thanks for picking this up again.
Petteri
signature.asc
De
On 02/07/2011 08:08 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 02/07/2011 07:55 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 02/07/2011 03:15 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 with exception that those using USE=sound for libcanberra should be
>>> split into i
On 02/07/2011 03:15 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>
> +1 with exception that those using USE=sound for libcanberra should be
> split into it's own USE flag called USE=libcanberra
> and USE=sound should be kept for the generic ones
>
libcanberra describes the means and not the results so we shou
On 02/02/2011 11:42 PM, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
>
> For the record, Kacper told me today that every developer is allowed to touch
> ppc/ppc64 profiles. Archies that don't want others to touch their profiles
> should mention it in the devmanual. I was not aware of that, I thought that
> !arch
On 01/31/2011 07:04 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
>
>> 2. I don't think it makes sense for QA to discipline developers
>> permanently in these cases. They should suspend access pending Devrel
>> resolution of the issue. Devrel should of course strongly consider
>> the input of QA.
>
> That should
On 01/29/2011 12:42 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> Finally, if Devrel, QA, and the Council have already talked this out
> and agree that QA is in the best place to police technical commit
> issues, then pipe this email to /dev/null...
>
The diff proposed in this thread has not yet been talked abou
On 01/07/2011 11:15 PM, Lars Wendler wrote:
> Sorry guys,
>
> after thinking about it I definitely chose the wrong lists. Won't happen
> again...
>
Also I wonder why the moderators thought this was appropriate for
-dev-announce?
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital si
On 01/03/2011 04:40 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Quoting PMS, Chapter 8:
>
> "All ebuild-defined variables discussed in this chapter must be defined
> independently of any system, profile or tree dependent data, and must
> not vary depending upon the ebuild phase."
>
> http://git.overlays.gentoo.
On 01/02/2011 11:04 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
>
> Whatever you folks eventually settle on, please send patches and
> suggestions to the GDP for our upgrade guide. I'd prefer that users
> have a possible upgrade path from *any* profile/version of Gentoo up
> through the present. If you decide not t
On 01/02/2011 05:19 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>
>
> One way we could drop EAPI 0 would be if we do a major review of tree
> and repo formats to improve upgrade paths, which would however likely
> require breaking backwards compatibility at such point.
> I believe such a change would
On 12/31/2010 12:29 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 12/30/2010 07:37 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> As the text was just approved it will take a while before Package
>> Managers release new versions that declare support for EAPI 4. As such,
>> the new EAPI 4 can't yet be used in
On 12/31/2010 01:02 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after approval of EAPI 4, there are now 5 different EAPIs available,
> and it's hard to remember what features are offered by which EAPI.
>
> So maybe it's about time that we deprecate EAPIs 0 and 1 for new
> ebuilds. As a first step, a warn
the text was just approved it will take a while before Package
Managers release new versions that declare support for EAPI 4. As such,
the new EAPI 4 can't yet be used in the main tree. You will be notified
as soon as you can start reaping the benefits.
On behalf of the Gentoo Council,
Petteri
On 12/17/2010 08:08 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Old-style virtuals are extremely messy and introduce an awful lot of
> complexity. They were supposed to be on the way out several years ago,
> with GLEP 37, but that seems to have stalled.
>
> Is there anything in particular holding back replacing
On 12/24/2010 11:19 AM, Justin (jlec) Lecher wrote:
> On 24/12/10 02:18, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>> What do you mean about python.eclass?
>> python.eclass doesn't define python_src_unpack().
>>
>
> No it doesn't, but calling the default() function in a phase will make
> the defa
On 12/13/2010 11:00 PM, Roy Bamford wrote:
>
> Markos,
>
> Interesting - How can you address future strategy and plans without
> addressing Gentoos meta structure too. It could not be a purely
> technical talk ... but thats what interests me.
>
There's no restriction for the talks to be techn
I tried getting input for talks from gentoo-user but so far there have
been no responses. Currently there aren't that many talks proposed for
the distribution miniconf so it should be easy to get purely Gentoo
related topics in. So what kind of Gentoo related talks would you like
to see and possibl
On 2.12.2010 17.31, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno gio, 02/12/2010 alle 17.24 +0200, Petteri Räty ha scritto:
>>
>> Ok thanks for clarifying the last point. Doesn't this go against your
>> original wish to mask it though?
>
> If you read my first mail, I
On 2.12.2010 15.38, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno gio, 02/12/2010 alle 10.19 +0200, Petteri Räty ha scritto:
>>
>> Maybe we should start with !=2.4 ebuilds?
>> This would force action but people could still keep installing stuff
>> needing older automake versio
On 2.12.2010 3.03, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Not sure if you know but we're currently experiencing a spur of build
> failures related to eautoreconf (in particular, eaclocal) and
> libtool-2.4 The new libtool release only works with automake 1.9 and
> later. [1]
>
Maybe we should s
On 11/28/2010 11:56 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>
>> It seems like the problem here is that we don't have separate profiles
>> for stable and unstable keywords. The obvious solution would be to have
>> separate profiles, mask the flags in the stable profiles, and unmask the
>> f
Any improvements to the text are welcome.
Regards,
Petteri
Title: Pending Removal of Java support in ia64
Author: Petteri Räty
Author: IA64 Arch Team
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2010-11-14
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Keyword: ia64
Display-If-Installed: dev-java/java-config
On 11/10/2010 07:16 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 10:05:17PM +0200, Petteri R??ty wrote:
>> On 11/08/2010 06:17 AM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>> On 16:42 Sun 07 Nov , Petteri R??ty wrote:
On 11/06/2010 11:22 AM, Krzysztof Pawlik wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm sendin
On 11/10/2010 02:42 PM, Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Втр, 09/11/2010 в 18:20 -0500, Anthony G. Basile пишет:
>> Title: Restructuring of Hardened profiles
> [...]
>> Display-If-Profile: hardened/linux
>
> Is it possible to restrict this news item to be shown on affected
> profiles only?
>
Yeah it shou
On 11/08/2010 06:17 AM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 16:42 Sun 07 Nov , Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 11/06/2010 11:22 AM, Krzysztof Pawlik wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm sending this patch for discussion, what it changes? The change is to
>>> wher
On 11/06/2010 11:22 AM, Krzysztof Pawlik wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm sending this patch for discussion, what it changes? The change is to where
> the final clone of repository will be placed, it used to be
> ${WORKDIR}/${module}
> (where module usually is the last component of source URI) to ${WORKDI
On 29.10.2010 15.02, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>
>> 2) Furthermore I would like to drop the following use flags from default
>> IUSE
>
>> -apache2
>> -ldap
>
>> A minimal server installation does requires neither apache2 nor ldap
>
> Although one can install a server without apache or
On 10/25/2010 04:24 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> I would like to request that 2 additional features are added to EAPI="4".
> These features will be needed for further development of python.eclass.
>
> 1. Support for "." characters in names of USE flags
Ideally we should have c
On 10/25/2010 06:13 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-10-25 16:31:41 Petteri Räty napisał(a):
>> On 10/25/2010 02:54 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (arfrever)
>> wrote:
>>> arfrever10/10/25 11:54:19
>>>
>>> Modified:
On 10/25/2010 02:54 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (arfrever)
wrote:
> arfrever10/10/25 11:54:19
>
> Modified: python.eclass
> Log:
> Set IUSE in EAPI >=4.
> Rename _parse_PYTHON_DEPEND() to _python_parse_PYTHON_DEPEND() and unset it
> after its using.
> Ban NEE
On 10/24/2010 09:49 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2010-10-18 17:26:13 Petteri Räty napisał(a):
>> On 10/18/2010 04:33 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>
>>> Subpatch #10 fixes exporting of python_pkg_setup() in EAPI >=4.
>>>
&g
On 10/23/2010 11:54 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> Subpatch #11 adds temporary support for EAPI="0" in
> python_get_implementational_package() to work
> around a part of bug #340395.
> This subpatch is very small, so I'm planning to commit it with the rest of
> subpatches.
>
P
On 10/23/2010 08:59 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno sab, 23/10/2010 alle 20.58 +0300, Petteri Räty ha scritto:
>> My point was to have something along the lines of "Removal in 15 days
>> because of the above."
>
> It would just be a formula to use, a
On 10/23/2010 08:51 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 08:39:22PM +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 10/23/2010 04:16 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> # Markos Chandras (23 Oct 2010)
>>> # on behalf of QA team
>>> #
>>> # Does not work w
On 10/23/2010 04:16 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> # Markos Chandras (23 Oct 2010)
> # on behalf of QA team
> #
> # Does not work with recent versions of ffmpeg.
> # Does not work with youtube anymore due to API changes.
> # Dead upstream.
> # Removal in 15 days.
> # Alternatives:
> # media-video/m
On 10/18/2010 04:33 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> Subpatch #10 fixes exporting of python_pkg_setup() in EAPI >=4.
>
> There will be other changes in API of python.eclass in EAPI >=4, so
> python.eclass still doesn't
> support EAPI="4".
>
EAPI 4 is not approved yet. Ebuilds c
On 10/16/2010 05:26 PM, Lars Wendler wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> a couple of weeks ago I was told that the PUEL license we have in our license
> pool is outdated. We currently have version 6 from July 28, 2008 but latest
> virtualbox releases come with version 8 from April 19, 2010.
> A quick glance
On 10/05/2010 02:32 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> I was just looking at some random ebuilds recently, and noticed this
> snippet in gcc-4.5* ebuilds:
>
> SSP_STABLE="amd64 x86 ppc ppc64 arm
> # uclibc need tls and nptl support for SSP support"
> SSP_UCLIBC_STABLE=""
>
> Please note how the #-s
On 09/30/2010 06:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 09/30/2010 12:41 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>> As another dev who generally runs stable (except things that I hack
>> on), another question: is it actually possible, as Diego seems to
>> suggest, to have two portages installed?
>
> You can run portage
On 09/28/2010 12:43 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>
> So if you want to have your say, gentoo-qa is there for that.
>
You should not cross post like this. Following the recent discussion the
only list allowing cross posting is gentoo-dev-announce.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description:
On 08/16/2010 08:45 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
>> Le lundi 16 août 2010 à 16:07 +0400, Peter Volkov a écrit :
>>> This was discussed many times here and since every time we had same
>>> consensus the policy is in place. It's just not w
On 09/26/2010 07:30 PM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2010 08:37:35 -0400
> Jacob Godserv wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 14:32:49 -0400
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>>> man, fix your line length. what a nub you are.
>>
>> Or adjust your mail client. Then you could save yourself the nam
On 08/31/2010 11:03 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> How about this as an idea:
> 1. Include a parsaable return date I suggest ("Returning:/MM/DD",
> "Returning:Unknown")
> 2. Automated emails when:
> 2.1. It's after the return date (weekly).
> 2.2. You start committing again.
Sounds good:
https:
I assume many of us have wrapper scripts to automatically generate
matching ChangeLog and CVS commit messages. When we eventually move to
git the plan is for the ChangeLog to be automatically generated from
git. To unify developer practices and to ease the transition to git it
has been proposed to
1 - 100 of 939 matches
Mail list logo
