On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 04:45:50PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote
Those 70-* and 80-* are in udev pkg_postinst, this news item,
everywhere... can all 3 be deleted if you haven't modified them yourself.
So that leaves one... local.rules... dunno about that. I'm curious.
One paragraph you
Mike Frysinger posted on Sun, 31 Mar 2013 01:59:52 -0400 as excerpted:
it'd be simpler if we just dropped [texinfo] altogether from @system.
if people want `info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages
want `makeinfo`, they can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category
(100 by a
On 2013-03-31, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 31/03/13 04:06, Philip Webb wrote:
130329 Samuli Suominen wrote:
Attached new version again, more generic than before.
I find this difficult to decipher. Who is it aimed at ?
I've just updated to Udev 200 . Following the news
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013, Duncan wrote:
Or maybe your intent was to either kill these deps or put them
behind USE=doc as well?
USE=doc doesn't look right for this, as it's normally used for large
sized documentation. Something like USE=info might be better.
Ulrich
On 2013-03-31, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 04:45:50PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote
Those 70-* and 80-* are in udev pkg_postinst, this news item,
everywhere... can all 3 be deleted if you haven't modified them yourself.
So that leaves one...
Hi,
net-p2p/deluge has open bugs for years[1] and I don't see anybody from
the net-p2p herd
to actually maintain it. It would be nice to find a new dedicated
maintainer for it. If a user is interested in helping us maintain it,
please contact proxy-maint_at_gentoo_dot_org[2].
[1]
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi,
net-p2p/deluge has open bugs for years[1] and I don't see anybody from
the net-p2p herd
to actually maintain it. It would be nice to find a new dedicated
maintainer for it. If a user is interested in helping us
Am Sonntag, 31. März 2013, 03:17:52 schrieb Samuli Suominen:
Nothing is stopping you from leaving out the symlink either and
migrating to the new name despite using only 1 network card either,
it's still more reliable than the kernel names
Why should I?
Kernel behaviour is traditionally way
On 31 March 2013 12:23, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hi,
net-p2p/deluge has open bugs for years[1] and I don't see anybody from
the net-p2p herd
to actually maintain it. It would be nice to find a new
I will help out with this package as well if needed.
On 31 Mar 2013 13:10, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 31 March 2013 12:23, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org
wrote:
Hi,
net-p2p/deluge has open bugs
Hello
Looks like this herd has some unattended bug for a long time (some for
some years), and looks not quite active. Is it still active? Should it
be dropped in favor of dedicated maintainers for its packages?
Thanks
130331 Samuli Suominen offered prompt + polite help re Udev 200 :
Thanks. In fact, it's a bit more complex than I thought yesterday.
After moving the '70 80' files into a subdirectory restarting, I get :
root:501 ~ dhcpcd
dhcpcd[830]: version 5.6.4 starting
... [nothing happens for
On 31/03/13 17:14, Pacho Ramos wrote:
Hello
Looks like this herd has some unattended bug for a long time (some for
some years), and looks not quite active. Is it still active? Should it
be dropped in favor of dedicated maintainers for its packages?
Thanks
I've just added myself back to
On 31 March 2013 15:32, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 31/03/13 17:14, Pacho Ramos wrote:
Hello
Looks like this herd has some unattended bug for a long time (some for
some years), and looks not quite active. Is it still active? Should it
be dropped in favor of dedicated
Hello,
(I was redirected from gentoo-doc@ to ask this here.)
I think it's a good idea to expand the categories' descriptions (found
in the corresponding metadata.xml files) with more accurate descriptions
of which packages are welcome to fit in which categories.
The current descriptions are
# Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org (31 Mar 2013)
# Package only applies to versions of Ruby which are no
# longer in the Portage tree; it was introduced because
# net-proxy/swiftiply needed it, but I will instead fix
# that package to no longer need this package.
# Removal in 30 days.
On 31/03/2013 22:46, Tom Wijsman wrote:
# Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org (31 Mar 2013)
# Package only applies to versions of Ruby which are no
Don't 30 days-delay a package you added because you haven't checked it.
Just kill it.
And next time be less commit-happy about adding packages, please.
On 31 March 2013 21:50, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
On 31/03/2013 22:46, Tom Wijsman wrote:
# Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org (31 Mar 2013)
# Package only applies to versions of Ruby which are no
Don't 30 days-delay a package you added because you haven't checked it.
Just
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 22:50:29 +0200
Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
Don't 30 days-delay a package you added because you haven't checked
it. Just kill it.
And next time be less commit-happy about adding packages, please.
Okay, thank you for letting me know; I'll see today as
On 03/31/2013 01:59 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
personally, i've never found info pages usable.
ditto.
it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people want
`info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want `makeinfo`, they
can DEPEND on it -- few fall into
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
the new texinfo-5.x series has rewritten makeinfo in perl. the main `info`
program is still in pure C.
when it comes to packages installing .info pages, it's largely limited to the
GNU projects as the format has never
On 03/31/2013 06:19 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sun, 31 Mar 2013, Duncan wrote:
Or maybe your intent was to either kill these deps or put them
behind USE=doc as well?
USE=doc doesn't look right for this, as it's normally used for large
sized documentation. Something like USE=info might
On 31/03/2013 07:59, Mike Frysinger wrote:
it'd be simpler if we just dropped it altogether from @system. if people
want
`info`, they can `emerge` it themselves. if packages want `makeinfo`, they
can DEPEND on it -- few fall into this category (100 by a rough survey of
random Gentoo
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2013-03-31 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
dev-php/pecl-zendoptimizerplus 2013-03-26 18:55:44 olemarkus
media-gfx/picasa2013-03-27 13:15:55 moult
I have sent a msg to gentoo-user describing how to solve this problem.
Perhaps it needs to be mentioned in the news item or wiki entry.
--
,,
SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities
25 matches
Mail list logo
