[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] toolchain-funcs.eclass / toolchain-glibc.eclass - gcc-6 bugfixes and updates

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017, at 18:15 CDT, Matthias Maier wrote: > [...] and of course, many thanks to Arfrever for patches and his kind support! Best, Matthias signature.asc Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] toolchain-funcs.eclass / toolchain-glibc.eclass - gcc-6 bugfixes and updates

Hello all, this is a series of patches against the toolchian-funcs and toolchain-glibc eclasses, most notably - introducing new tc-enables-pie(), tc-enables-ssp(), tc-enables-ssp-strong() and tc-enables-ssp-all() functions in toolchain-funcs compatible with gcc >=6 and clang as a

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/5] toolchain-glibc.eclass: Build most of >=sys-libs/glibc-2.25 with -fstack-protector-all (bug #609048).

From: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis configure accepts --enable-stack-protector=... option which results in build system passing appropriate -fstack-protector... option when possible. Signed-off-by: Matthias Maier --- eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 5/5] eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass: skip pie check for gcc-6 or newer

For gcc-6 and newer the old logic in the toolchain-glibc eclass: if use hardened && gcc-specs-pie ; then append-cppflags -DPIC else filter-flags -fPIE fi is obsolete. Simply disable the check. --- eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass | 24 +++- 1 file changed, 15

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/5] toolchain-funcs.eclass: Add functions for detection of PIE / SSP in way compatible with GCC >=6.

From: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis Newly added tc-enables-pie(), tc-enables-ssp(), tc-enables-ssp-strong() and tc-enables-ssp-all() check macros instead of specs. This solution also works with older GCC and with Clang. Signed-off-by: Matthias Maier

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 4/5] eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass: use tc-enables-pie instead of gcc-specs-pie

--- eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass b/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass index 5be31eb193..270c9cdac7 100644 --- a/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass +++ b/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 3/5] toolchain-glibc.eclass: Always enable stack guard randomization (bug #621742).

From: Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis Signed-off-by: Matthias Maier --- eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass b/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass index

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On 06/14/2017 06:11 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > Is it time to start thinking about an app-containers category? > If so, is it ok for me to start an app-containers category with these > packages then we can look into moving other packages to it? Personally I don't see much value in introducing a

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:11:49 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for > container-related utilities. > > Currently, the best place to put them would be app-emulation, or > app-misc or dev-util, probably

Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrites: dev-libs/radlib, net-voip/gnugk, sci-electronics/ghdl...

On 06/14/2017 10:21 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > # Pacho Ramos (14 Jun 2017) > # All consumers of this newer versions never got ported, if finally we need > # to readd a even newer version of this packages with an hypothetical newer > # Ekiga, we will need to work on new ebuilds

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:06 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 07:00:05PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: >> On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:11 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: >> > All, >> > >> > I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for >> >

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:11 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: >> All, >> >> I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for >> container-related utilities. >> >> Currently, the best place to put them

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 07:00:05PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:11 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > > All, > > > > I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for > > container-related utilities. > > > > Currently, the best place to put them would

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:11 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for > container-related utilities. > > Currently, the best place to put them would be app-emulation, or > app-misc or dev-util, probably app-emulation would be

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 05:16:55PM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 14/06/17 17:11, William Hubbs wrote: > > All, > > > > I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for > > container-related utilities. > > > > Currently, the best place to put them would be app-emulation,

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

On 14/06/17 17:11, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for > container-related utilities. > > Currently, the best place to put them would be app-emulation, or > app-misc or dev-util, probably app-emulation would be my first choice. >

[gentoo-dev] rfc: new category, app-containers

All, I am about to write two new ebuilds for packages for Gentoo that are for container-related utilities. Currently, the best place to put them would be app-emulation, or app-misc or dev-util, probably app-emulation would be my first choice. Is it time to start thinking about an app-containers

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:57:38 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > No. I have already spent too much time on this. We're already long > past all useful use cases Also, if you feel that way, then please stop working on this entirely for now. You're not bringing any good to anyone,

[gentoo-dev] Lastrites: dev-libs/radlib, net-voip/gnugk, sci-electronics/ghdl...

# Pacho Ramos (14 Jun 2017) # Fails to build, nothing needs it in the tree, bug #557450. Removal in a # month. dev-libs/radlib # Pacho Ramos (14 Jun 2017) # Relies on lots of dead old gnome libs, relies also on berlios.de and it is # dead for more than 8

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 15:57:38 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: [...] > > [...] > > > > > > > [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:ReqUse > > > > > > > > > > > > I really don't like the reordering thing. Even the > > > > > > restricted syntax does not fix the issue

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On śro, 2017-06-14 at 15:16 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 14:24:48 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > > On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:06 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:13:42 +0200 > > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 14:24:48 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:06 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:13:42 +0200 > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > On wto, 2017-06-13 at 12:27 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On śro, 2017-06-14 at 11:06 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:13:42 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > > On wto, 2017-06-13 at 12:27 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2017 21:17:16 +0200 > > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Forced/automatic USE flag constraints (codename: ENFORCED_USE)

On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:13:42 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > On wto, 2017-06-13 at 12:27 +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Jun 2017 21:17:16 +0200 > > Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > I've actually started typing the initial specification yesterday >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] systemd.eclass: Improve systemd_install_serviced documentation

On wto, 2017-06-13 at 22:52 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 6:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On nie, 2017-06-11 at 20:23 +0100, Chris Mayo wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Mayo > > > --- > > > > > > Nothing added, just suggesting how