Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Alec Warner
2011/11/10 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org: Hi guys, In last 3 days i recompiled chromium 3x 1x rebuild for cups useflag 1x update 1x rebuild for cups useflag If you screw the ebuild up then always think if the change is worth the stupid long recompile time. I tentatively agree in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Michał Górny
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 00:22:34 -0800 Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote: Like it is not enough there is version bump every few days... Just alter only live ebuild and branch of it with each release and do not alter the releases unless really critical bug is there. People are patient and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2011/11/11 Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org: Like it is not enough there is version bump every few days... Just alter only live ebuild and branch of it with each release and do not alter the releases unless really critical bug is there. People are patient and they can wait for bugfixes. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Brian Harring
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 08:58:14AM +0100, Tom Chv??tal wrote: Hi guys, In last 3 days i recompiled chromium 3x 1x rebuild for cups useflag 1x update 1x rebuild for cups useflag snip Chromium moves fast and you're obviously running unstable keywording. Meaning you're

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2011/11/11 Brian Harring ferri...@gmail.com: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 08:58:14AM +0100, Tom Chv??tal wrote: Hi guys, In last 3 days i recompiled chromium 3x 1x rebuild for cups useflag 1x update 1x rebuild for cups useflag snip Chromium moves fast and you're obviously running

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Brian Harring
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:48:15AM +0100, Tom Chv??tal wrote: 2011/11/11 Brian Harring ferri...@gmail.com: The build issue was with -cups so useflag was removed and hard dependency enabled, fine with me. But why the fuck the bump was issued next day still hard-depending on it and in day

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Marc Schiffbauer
* Tomáš Chvátal schrieb am 11.11.11 um 12:38 Uhr: Hello guys, As my only Gentoo installation is libreoffice test virtual I am not able to really care about these. So these packages are up for grabs if anyone finds them interesting: I will take this one: net-dns/opendnssec -Marc --

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Marc Schiffbauer
* Tomáš Chvátal schrieb am 11.11.11 um 12:38 Uhr: Hello guys, As my only Gentoo installation is libreoffice test virtual I am not able to really care about these. So these packages are up for grabs if anyone finds them interesting: and those two as well as opendnssec depends on them

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek)
2011/11/11 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org: Hello guys, As my only Gentoo installation is libreoffice test virtual I am not able to really care about these. So these packages are up for grabs if anyone finds them interesting: app-misc/dsgui app-misc/klavaro dev-cpp/yaml-cpp

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 OK, to clarify i'm just re-listing which packages ppl have spoken up for: On 11/11/11 06:38 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: app-misc/dsgui app-misc/klavaro dev-cpp/yaml-cpp - neurogeek dev-libs/softhsm - mschiff dev-ruby/dnsruby - mschiff

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:45:29 +0100 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Maybe you could consider some of the releases major and other minor, and just keep a mask for those minor. Much like we did with Opera some time ago. I have no idea what you mean. It didn't look like that when I was

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Michał Górny
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 15:44:07 +0100 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:45:29 +0100 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Maybe you could consider some of the releases major and other minor, and just keep a mask for those minor. Much like we did with Opera some

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Nathan Phillip Brink
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 09:38:24AM -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: OK, to clarify i'm just re-listing which packages ppl have spoken up for: On 11/11/11 06:38 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: app-misc/dsgui app-misc/klavaro dev-cpp/yaml-cpp - neurogeek dev-libs/softhsm - mschiff

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Friday 11 November 2011 06:38:00 Tomáš Chvátal wrote: sys-devel/autoconf-archive i'd been updating this for years ... didn't realize someone else had taken it over ;). i'll move it to base-system herd. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] have portage be quiet by default

2011-11-11 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday 10 November 2011 22:23:57 Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 07:17 PM, Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 06:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 10 November 2011 20:39:11 Mike

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 15:58:10 +0100 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: I simply mean that weekly builds were masked. I still do it like that with snapshots and in fact with the entire www-client/opera-next series. jer

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2011-11-11 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Friday 11 November 2011 10:05:56 Nathan Phillip Brink wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 09:38:24AM -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: On 11/11/11 06:38 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: sys-devel/autoconf-archive - binki I'll take autoconf-archive, unless if someone else wants it. i was going to set

Re: [gentoo-dev] have portage be quiet by default

2011-11-11 Thread Zac Medico
On 11/11/2011 07:11 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 10 November 2011 22:23:57 Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 07:17 PM, Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 06:59 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 10 November 2011 21:11:38 Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 05:56 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: have portage be quiet by default

2011-11-11 Thread Zac Medico
On 11/10/2011 10:59 PM, Duncan wrote: Zac Medico posted on Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:11:38 -0800 as excerpted: I think --quiet-build would be a reasonable default, but --quiet suppresses various warning messages that I think need to be enabled by default for newbies. What's the difference in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Brian Harring ferri...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 08:58:14AM +0100, Tom Chv??tal wrote: Hi guys, In last 3 days i recompiled chromium 3x 1x rebuild for cups useflag 1x update 1x rebuild for cups useflag snip Chromium moves fast and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: have portage be quiet by default

2011-11-11 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Friday 11 November 2011 10:50:47 Zac Medico wrote: On 11/10/2011 10:59 PM, Duncan wrote: But please do at least einfo the change, and what to do to get back to non-quiet by default if desired. Someone mentioned a news item. I'm not sure it warrants that, but certainly an einfo, and if

[gentoo-dev] Re: Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Mike Gilbert
On 11/11/2011 2:58 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: Hi guys, In last 3 days i recompiled chromium 3x 1x rebuild for cups useflag 1x update 1x rebuild for cups useflag If you screw the ebuild up then always think if the change is worth the stupid long recompile time. Like it is not enough

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stop altering of current release ebuilds and propagate the changes slowly

2011-11-11 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
First thanks for the feedback about chromium, and sorry for the annoyances. I'm not sure how we can fix that though. I've batched my replies to several people in this e-mail. On 11/11/11 8:58 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: In last 3 days i recompiled chromium 3x So the timeline is: 26 Oct

[gentoo-dev] Lastrite: pythoncard and boa-constructor (part of wxGTK 2.6 removal)

2011-11-11 Thread Samuli Suominen
# Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org (11 Nov 2011) # Masked for removal in 30 days since wxpython-2.6 is going away wrt bug 330683 dev-python/pythoncard dev-util/boa-constructor

[gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread William Hubbs
Hi all, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389437 has prompted a discussion of whether or not we should use ifconfig in openrc to configure networking on linux systems. I'm not asking that we consider removing net-tools from systems, because there are tools there that we still need. In my

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
William Hubbs schrieb: I realize there would be a trade-off if I stop supporting linux's ifconfig and route in openrc, but how much of a trade-off? Would the benefits of iproute2 outweigh the down side of not supporting ifconfig and route on linux? What does everyone think? +1 Do you need

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread Matt Thode
On Nov 11, 2011, at 4:01 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: William Hubbs schrieb: I realize there would be a trade-off if I stop supporting linux's ifconfig and route in openrc, but how much of a trade-off? Would the benefits of iproute2 outweigh the down side of not supporting ifconfig

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread William Hubbs
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:01:43PM +0100, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: William Hubbs schrieb: I realize there would be a trade-off if I stop supporting linux's ifconfig and route in openrc, but how much of a trade-off? Would the benefits of iproute2 outweigh the down side of not

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Matt Thode schrieb: I think that we should be using the new tools by now, it's been in development for the last ten years. There would have to be some sort of migration path for people to use though. Those people can continue using the tools they like, what openrc calls is not visible to

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread William Hubbs
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 04:10:50PM -0600, Matt Thode wrote: I think that we should be using the new tools by now, it's been in development for the last ten years. There would have to be some sort of migration path for people to use though. If you have iproute2 installed, and you do not have

[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.6 unmasking

2011-11-11 Thread Ryan Hill
On Sun, 30 Oct 2011 15:22:17 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: 4.6.2 is now in the tree. It will be unmasked next weekend. Yeah I'm a tease. Looks like we have enough issues that I want to do another patchset. We also have showstopper bugs in grub:0 and libmpeg2 that need looking

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc: use iproute2 for all network handling in linux

2011-11-11 Thread Joshua Saddler
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 15:53:44 -0600 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Hi all, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=389437 has prompted a discussion of whether or not we should use ifconfig in openrc to configure networking on linux systems. I'm not asking that we consider