On nie, 2017-07-30 at 00:56 +0200, Manuel Rüger wrote:
> Pushed as:
> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=cff2c0149142843316e1851c2e73bcec30f08471
>
> Thanks for the patient reviews, Zac!
>
I'm sorry for noticing this only now when I'm enabling it but we have
already:
On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Manuel Rüger wrote:
> Pushed as:
> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=cff2c0149142843316e1851c2e73bcec30f08471
>
> Thanks for the patient reviews, Zac!
>
> Cheers,
> Manuel
I've added an early warning for invalid
The following kludge is present in toolchain.eclass, in
toolchain_pkg_pretend():
[[ -z ${UCLIBC_VER} ]] && [[ ${CTARGET} == *-uclibc* ]] && \
die "Sorry, this version does not support uClibc"
The below patch removes this. I've been running a gcc-6-built,
Pushed as:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=cff2c0149142843316e1851c2e73bcec30f08471
Thanks for the patient reviews, Zac!
Cheers,
Manuel
On 28.07.2017 18:24, Zac Medico wrote:
> The patch is looking really good now. Thanks for working on this!
>
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 05:56:25PM -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote
> If upstream does a new release, fixes bugs. Gentoo marks a previous
> release stable. It is stabilizing a package with issues fixed upstream.
> That does not make sense. Gentoo issues maybe good, but not upstreams.
>
> I
On Sat, 2017-07-29 at 19:41 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > why take away the stable choice?
>
> I think it is rather clear that stable keywords aren't going anywhere
> for architectures like amd64. I suggest we drop all of the subthreads
> on this topic and get back to other interesting thoughts
On Tue, 25 Jul 2017 09:22:08 +0200
Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> Second, I believe a lot of the value in our stable tree comes *just*
> from the requirement that stabilization is only requested after 30
> days without major bugs/changes in the unstable tree. Assuming there
> are
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 12:44:20 +0200 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 25. Juli 2017, 01:22:44 CEST schrieb Peter Stuge:
> >
> > I hold a perhaps radical view: I would like to simply remove stable.
> >
> > I continue to feel that maintaining two worlds (stable+unstable)
> > carries with it
> why take away the stable choice?
I think it is rather clear that stable keywords aren't going anywhere
for architectures like amd64. I suggest we drop all of the subthreads
on this topic and get back to other interesting thoughts (which may
include dropping stable for some other arches of
Am Freitag, 28. Juli 2017, 23:12:26 CEST schrieb A. Wilcox:
>
> At least I have a good reason to unsubscribe now.
>
>
> Farewell,
> --arw
>
Please don't take William as a typical Gentoo developer. He isn't.
--
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl,
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 18:12:52 -0500 Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Sergei Trofimovich
> wrote:
>
> > TL;DR;TL;DR:
> >
> [...]
>
> Here's a data point you may, or may not, find relevant. in 16 years of
> using Gentoo exclusively, the only one time I
11 matches
Mail list logo