> On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 2:44 PM Georgy Yakovlev wrote:
> > We've been collecting more and more container related packages in
> > app-emulation/*
> > What do you think about finally moving those packages to separate category?
> As always my opinion is that:
> (a) Categories were a des
> On Sun, 2021-01-03 at 21:47 +0100, MichaŠGórny wrote:
> Hello,
> > Please review the news item inlined below. This is based on what
> > I discussed with blueness (LibreSSL team lead). The news item is kinda
> > long-ish because I wanted to include the full rationale since I believe
> > our
> Hi all,
> Â I am proposing to make the `man` USE flag into a global one.
> Currently it is used by ~45 packages most of which have the same
> description 'Build and install man pages':
> https://packages.gentoo.org/useflags/man
> Hopefully no objections to this part?
> Cheers,
> Aisha
Seems
> I was using uclibc-ng builds for MIPS to build netboot images between 2017
> and 2019 to refine my build processes. uclibc-ng still produces smaller
> overall binaries and libs for the netboot than musl does (usually ~1MB
> smaller, which is actually significant, especially on SGI IP22 systems).
from "Anthony G. Basile" date: Tue, 5 Jan 2021 16:05:44
-0500
> On 1/5/21 8:43 AM, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> > On 2021/01/05 13:08, Thomas Mueller wrote:
> >>> I'd like feedback from people about the possibility of dropping support
> >&
> I'd like feedback from people about the possibility of dropping support
> for uclibc-ng. If you are unfamiliar, its the successor to uclibc as a
> C Standard Library for embedded systems, ie a replacement for glibc
> bloat. However, it is inferior to musl which serves the same purpose
> and whi
> # Alfredo Tupone (2020-08-16)
> # Ported to py3.8 but not yet released
> # Masked to allow py2.7 removal
> # MichaŠGórny (2021-01-01)
> # Masking for removal to prevent eclass from crashing on these packages.
> # Removal in 30 days.
> dev-ada/langkit
> dev-ada/libadalang
> dev-ada/libadalang
Excerpt from MichaŠGórny and previous post:
> > Further, LibreSSL comes out of the OpenBSD project, which has a good
> > reputation on code quality.
> I could buy that if it actually said anything about LibreSSL code
> quality. So far you're guessing that it might or might not, especially
> g
> Hi, everyone.
> TL;DR: we might keep Python 2.7 supported as a build-time dependency
> of a few packages as necessary, while removing the eclass support for
> installing packages for py2.7.
> As I've mentioned earlier, the plan is to get rid of Python 2.7 target
> support at the beginning of 2
> Benda Xu wrote:
> > > I was wondering if the openbsd prefix support is something
> > > that is still garnering any interest from gentoo?
> > There is still interest in Gentoo. But no one seems to have energy to
> > take care of it.
> FWIW I have interest in this as well.
> > Your contributi
10 matches
Mail list logo
