On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 11:39 +0200, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
On 12 Jun 2008, at 04:16, Brian Harring wrote:
Why the exherbo/paludis/PMS folk decided to go this route to report,
I'm not quite sure aside from assuming they're just griefers.
s-exherbo/paludis/PMS-pkgcore-g and:
On 12 Jun 2008, at 04:16, Brian Harring wrote:
Why the exherbo/paludis/PMS folk decided to go this route to report,
I'm not quite sure aside from assuming they're just griefers.
s-exherbo/paludis/PMS-pkgcore-g and:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 07:16:05PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 07:00:16PM +0100, David Leverton wrote:
On Thursday 12 June 2008 02:46:03 Jim Ramsay wrote:
David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:39:21AM +0200, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
On 12 Jun 2008, at 04:16, Brian Harring wrote:
Why the exherbo/paludis/PMS folk decided to go this route to report,
I'm not quite sure aside from assuming they're just griefers.
s-exherbo/paludis/PMS-pkgcore-g and:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 07:02:52AM -0400, Thomas Anderson wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 07:16:05PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
I'm not quite sure how you're trying to present this, but are you really
trying to say that EAPI 1 isn't documented? I myself found this in
pms.pdf in 2 minutes(it's
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 07:00:16PM +0100, David Leverton wrote:
On Thursday 12 June 2008 02:46:03 Jim Ramsay wrote:
David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to
work around the bug, I'd say it's pretty real.
For those of