Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 06:59:19 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Ulrich Mueller > wrote: > > > > And on what basis would you stabilise Portage, when there are no > > ebuilds in the tree to test its EAPI 6 code? > > > > As long as

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] src_prepare: Do not expect eapply_user in EAPIs not having it

On 11/18/2015 08:32 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > --- > bin/phase-functions.sh | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/bin/phase-functions.sh b/bin/phase-functions.sh > index abbc602..042e242 100644 > --- a/bin/phase-functions.sh > +++ b/bin/phase-functions.sh > @@

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 06:59:19 -0500 > Rich Freeman wrote: > >> Actually, what is less clear to me is how portage versioning actually >> works, or if we attach any meaning to the version numbers at all. >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:02:15 +0100 > Alexis Ballier wrote: > >> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:53:17 +1100 >> Michael Palimaka wrote: >> >> > What do you think? >> >> >> +1 >> >> even

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:23:55 -0800 Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:02:15 +0100 > Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:53:17 +1100 > > Michael Palimaka wrote: > > > > > What do you think? > > > >

[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:05:26 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an > >> advanced user, who will be able to cope with the situation. :) > Only that there is no real

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote: [...] > > What do you think? +1 for banning them. Thanks, Davide

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] eapply_user: die if current phase is not src_prepare

On 11/18/2015 12:01 AM, Zac Medico wrote: > --- > bin/phase-helpers.sh | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/bin/phase-helpers.sh b/bin/phase-helpers.sh > index da9aa7c..f42f805 100644 > --- a/bin/phase-helpers.sh > +++ b/bin/phase-helpers.sh > @@ -1079,6 +1079,8 @@ fi > >

[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 6 portage is out!

> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, »Q« wrote: > When ~ keywording is needed for dependencies, the PM's output makes > it clear what's needed. In cases where EAPI 6 is needed for > dependencies but the PM is unaware of EAPI 6, will there be good > clues in the PM's output that the PM itself needs to be ~

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:02:15 +0100 Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:53:17 +1100 > Michael Palimaka wrote: > > > What do you think? > > > +1 > > even if I sometimes use those cmake-utils_use*, they tend to confuse > me and find

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

Am Mittwoch, 18. November 2015, 12:12:05 schrieb Alexander Berntsen: > On 18/11/15 12:05, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > Only that there is no real difference to the existing situation > > when mixing stable and unstable. It is not guaranteed that all > > dependencies of an unstable package are stable,

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] src_prepare: Do not expect eapply_user in EAPIs not having it

--- bin/phase-functions.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/bin/phase-functions.sh b/bin/phase-functions.sh index abbc602..042e242 100644 --- a/bin/phase-functions.sh +++ b/bin/phase-functions.sh @@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ __dyn_prepare() { __ebuild_phase

Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog - Infra Response; update 2015/11/11, potential impact to 30min rsync cycle

On 11/18/2015 12:55 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > That's taking about half a second if I run it from the command-line. > ...and this takes even longer: cinfo = self.grab(['git', self._work_tree, 'diff-tree', '--name-status', '--no-renames',

Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog - Infra Response; update 2015/11/11, potential impact to 30min rsync cycle

On 11/18/2015 09:48 AM, Peter Stuge wrote: > Peter Stuge wrote: >> Robin H. Johnson wrote: >>> However, the largest sticking point, even with parallel threads, is that >>> it seems the base ChangeLog generation is incredibly slow. It averages >>> above 350ms per package right now (at 19k packages

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 11:47:35 -0500 Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Brian Dolbec > wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:02:15 +0100 > > Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:53:17 +1100 > >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 18/11/15 02:25 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > >> It doesn't seem that unlikely to me... > >> 1. Otherwise stable system with package "foo" keyworded as >> ~arch. > >> 2. foo needs some

[gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 18:06:23 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, »Q« wrote: > > > When ~ keywording is needed for dependencies, the PM's output makes > > it clear what's needed. In cases where EAPI 6 is needed for > > dependencies but the PM is unaware

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 > And, as a developer maintaining bar in #3 above, you should make > sure that either the stable version satisfies all rdeps (even those > in ~arch), or you don't remove the EAPI5 ~arch version until all the > rdeps are EAPI6. > > Theoretically

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > We are talking about people who run Gentoo stable who need to > keyword several specific packages because the lack of manpower > leads to Gentoo stable by itself not being very usable for most > people. > In this

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an >> advanced user, who will be able to cope with the situation. :) > This attitude is shitty, and I am willing to wager a really big >

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of > Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the > details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer. > People who run ~arch are not

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/11/15 12:59, Rich Freeman wrote: > Actually, what is less clear to me is how portage versioning > actually works, or if we attach any meaning to the version numbers > at all. The higher number is the newer version. - -- Alexander

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:05 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > And on what basis would you stabilise Portage, when there are no > ebuilds in the tree to test its EAPI 6 code? > As long as the EAPI6 code in the new portage is no more broken than the EAPI6 code in the current stable

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

> On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Alexander Berntsen wrote: >> And on what basis would you stabilise Portage, when there are no >> ebuilds in the tree to test its EAPI 6 code? > When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of > Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: app-pda/libopensync* and friends

# Michael Palimaka (18 Nov 2015) # Ebuilds unfinished work-in-progress. Dead upstream. # Masked for removal in 30 days. Bug #550234. app-pda/libopensync app-pda/libopensync-plugin-file app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gnokii app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gpe

[gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

cmake-utils.eclass currently defines 10 helper functions to assist in configuring packages. For example: local mycmakeargs=( $(cmake-utils_use_with foo LibFoo) ) which outputs -DWITH_LibFoo=ON or OFF Most of these helpers were introduced before, and could be replaced by, usex: local

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:53:17 +1100 Michael Palimaka wrote: > What do you think? +1 even if I sometimes use those cmake-utils_use*, they tend to confuse me and find -DABCD=$(usex ...) much easier to understand for the occasional user of cmake-utils.eclass.

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/11/15 13:01, Rich Freeman wrote: > People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're > contributors who have volunteered to test packages. We are talking about people who run Gentoo stable who need to keyword several specific packages

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/11/15 12:05, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > Only that there is no real difference to the existing situation > when mixing stable and unstable. It is not guaranteed that all > dependencies of an unstable package are stable, so already now > users may

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/11/15 12:23, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > That sort of QA should take place before making a new Portage > relaese. I was talking about marking it stable, though. The problem we are talking about isn't making sure Portage's EAPI 6 support is bug

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an > > advanced user, who will be able to cope with the

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an > advanced user, who will be able to cope with the situation. :) This attitude is shitty, and I am willing to wager a really big bunch of

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] eapply_user: die if current phase is not src_prepare

--- bin/phase-helpers.sh | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/bin/phase-helpers.sh b/bin/phase-helpers.sh index da9aa7c..f42f805 100644 --- a/bin/phase-helpers.sh +++ b/bin/phase-helpers.sh @@ -1079,6 +1079,8 @@ fi if ___eapi_has_eapply_user; then eapply_user() { +

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

Am Mittwoch, 18. November 2015, 10:25:23 schrieb Alexander Berntsen: > On 18/11/15 08:25, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > - If you mix stable and unstable then you are by definition an > > advanced user, who will be able to cope with the situation. :) > > This attitude is shitty, and I am willing to

[gentoo-portage-dev] Feature freeze/bugfix frenzy

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, Regarding EAPI 6: Let's not commit anything but bugfixes until 23rd. Then we do a .6 release, aiming at getting it stabilised. So unless there are any objections, please don't merge any non-bugfix patches until post release. Optimally,

[gentoo-portage-dev] Infra branch

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, Robin (robbat2) have joined the Portage team. Welcome, Robin! He is going to launch an infra branch in order to commit necessary hotfixes or infra-specific short-term patches, etc. If possible and convenient he will hopefully get reviews

Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog - Infra Response; update 2015/11/11, potential impact to 30min rsync cycle

Peter Stuge wrote: > Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > However, the largest sticking point, even with parallel threads, is that > > it seems the base ChangeLog generation is incredibly slow. It averages > > above 350ms per package right now (at 19k packages in a full cycle, it's > > a long time), but

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: net-libs/courier-unicode/

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 06:51:04 + (UTC) "Eray Aslan" wrote: > commit: e9620a23f862f69352b0ca31de2f5e4ed642cc69 > Author: Eray Aslan gentoo org> > AuthorDate: Wed Nov 18 06:50:26 2015 + > Commit: Eray Aslan gentoo org> > CommitDate: Wed Nov 18 06:50:26 2015

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ban cmake-utils_use_* in EAPI 6

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 09:53:17PM +1100, Michael Palimaka wrote: > $(cmake-utils_use_with foo LibFoo) > -DWITH_LibFoo=$(usex foo) > > What do you think? Do it! I have no idea what the cmake one is supposed to do without reading docs. The usex one is really obvious.