On Sun, 11 Feb 2024, Sam James wrote:
parona ended up messaging me and pointing out that
https://pkgcore.github.io/pkgcheck/man/pkgcheck.html#useflagwithoutdeps
already says...
In cases where this USE flag is appropriate, you can silence this
warning by adding a description to this USE flag in
On 2/10/24 10:46 PM, Sam James wrote:
> parona ended up messaging me and pointing out that
> https://pkgcore.github.io/pkgcheck/man/pkgcheck.html#useflagwithoutdeps
> already says...
>
>> In cases where this USE flag is appropriate, you can silence this
>> warning by adding a description to this
Eli Schwartz writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> On 2/9/24 7:04 PM, Sam James wrote:
>>
>> Eli Schwartz writes:
>>> Often, USE flags have an obvious point even without selecting or
>>> deselecting dependencies -- usually because their maintainers took care
>>> in describing it in
On 2/10/24 12:26 PM, stefan1 wrote:
> On 2024-02-10 11:48, David Seifert wrote:
>>
>> Are users like you going to maintain and fix these obscure bugs too? I
>> don't recall seeing you sending in many fixes or patches, yet you seem
>> to be demanding that we go out of our way to accommodate
On 2/10/24 6:22 AM, orbea wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 16:56:55 -0500
> Eli Schwartz wrote:
>> As evidenced by the removal of libressl and eudev, this logic is
>> fallacious and wrong and not the way Gentoo is developed.
>
> Fwiw I still use both and Gentoo removing specifically Libressl has
>
On 2/9/24 7:04 PM, Sam James wrote:
>
> Eli Schwartz writes:
>> Often, USE flags have an obvious point even without selecting or
>> deselecting dependencies -- usually because their maintainers took care
>> in describing it in metadata.xml.
>>
>
> To pick up on this point: yes, if one concludes
On 2024-02-10 11:48, David Seifert wrote:
Are users like you going to maintain and fix these obscure bugs too? I
don't recall seeing you sending in many fixes or patches, yet you seem
to be demanding that we go out of our way to accommodate you.
I've sent and made plenty of patches to support
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 22:56 +, stefan1 wrote:
> On 2024-02-09 21:56, Eli Schwartz wrote:
> > On 2/9/24 4:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > > This is the part where you try to convince me that the things I
> > > want
> > > are stupid. OK. I don't care. I want it off. Leave me alone :)
> >
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 16:56:55 -0500
Eli Schwartz wrote:
> On 2/9/24 4:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > This is the part where you try to convince me that the things I want
> > are stupid. OK. I don't care. I want it off. Leave me alone :)
>
>
> As evidenced by the removal of libressl and
Eli Schwartz writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> On 2/9/24 2:57 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> One example I know off the top of my head is dev-lang/php where
>> USE=ipv6 isn't entirely about ipv6 connectivity (although it does do
>> that). It also augments some of the user-facing PHP
Michael Orlitzky writes:
> On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 14:09 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote:
>>
>> Asking out of genuine ignorance: what kind of direct behavioral changes
>> occur as a result of setting or unsetting USE=ipv6.
>
> One example I know off the top of my head is dev-lang/php where
> USE=ipv6
On 10/2/24 08:56, stefan1 wrote:
> Both removals definitely not still being contested and debated.
You've conveniently ignored the context immediately below the line that
you chose to quote and somehow decided to try and shoehorn in discussion
of a completely different (and settled) issue.
Andrey Grozin writes:
> Hello *,
>
> pkgcheck complains about each new version of dev-lisp/sbcl:
>
> UseFlagWithoutDeps: version 2.4.1: special small-files USE flag
> without effect on dependencies: [ unicode ]
>
> The USE flag "unicode" in the sbcl ebuild has nothing to do with
> installing /
On 2024-02-09 21:56, Eli Schwartz wrote:
On 2/9/24 4:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
This is the part where you try to convince me that the things I want
are stupid. OK. I don't care. I want it off. Leave me alone :)
As evidenced by the removal of libressl and eudev, this logic is
fallacious
On 2/9/24 4:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> This is the part where you try to convince me that the things I want
> are stupid. OK. I don't care. I want it off. Leave me alone :)
As evidenced by the removal of libressl and eudev, this logic is
fallacious and wrong and not the way Gentoo is
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 16:04 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote:
>
> Counterpoint: some PHP program out there is probably vulnerable because
> it tried to validate an ipv6 address and could not distinguish between
> "it's okay" and "idk if it's okay, the function you called does not
> exist" (because php
On 2/9/24 2:57 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> One example I know off the top of my head is dev-lang/php where
> USE=ipv6 isn't entirely about ipv6 connectivity (although it does do
> that). It also augments some of the user-facing PHP language functions
> with ipv6 support. Having them enabled is
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 14:09 -0500, Eli Schwartz wrote:
>
> Asking out of genuine ignorance: what kind of direct behavioral changes
> occur as a result of setting or unsetting USE=ipv6.
One example I know off the top of my head is dev-lang/php where
USE=ipv6 isn't entirely about ipv6 connectivity
On 2/9/24 12:17 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> USE=unicode and USE=ipv6 are different beasts. In many cases they
> directly and immediately change the behavior of the package. I think
> that there are good reasons to want those two disabled, but the user's
> reasoning shouldn't really matter. The
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 12:17 PM Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 11:57 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >
> > Based on this pkgcheck issue, this originates from a decision from by
> > Gentoo QA team.
> >
> > https://github.com/pkgcore/pkgcheck/issues/414#issuecomment-1213057268
> >
>
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 11:57 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> Based on this pkgcheck issue, this originates from a decision from by
> Gentoo QA team.
>
> https://github.com/pkgcore/pkgcheck/issues/414#issuecomment-1213057268
>
Thanks for the dig. I agree with the reasoning for things like
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 11:07 AM Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 10:54 -0500, Ionen Wolkens wrote:
> >
> > Is there even any reason to ever disable unicode support? Point is that
> > why have USE for it? Or does it introduce additional dependencies?
>
> Being able to disable
On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 10:54 -0500, Ionen Wolkens wrote:
>
> Is there even any reason to ever disable unicode support? Point is that
> why have USE for it? Or does it introduce additional dependencies?
Being able to disable things like this is one of the few reasons why
people choose Gentoo.
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 03:23:10PM +, Andrey Grozin wrote:
> Hello *,
>
> pkgcheck complains about each new version of dev-lisp/sbcl:
>
> UseFlagWithoutDeps: version 2.4.1: special small-files USE flag without
> effect on dependencies: [ unicode ]
>
> The USE flag "unicode" in the sbcl
On Fri, Feb 9, 2024 at 10:23 AM Andrey Grozin
wrote:
>
> Hello *,
>
> pkgcheck complains about each new version of dev-lisp/sbcl:
>
> UseFlagWithoutDeps: version 2.4.1: special small-files USE flag without
> effect on dependencies: [ unicode ]
>
> The USE flag "unicode" in the sbcl ebuild has
Hello *,
pkgcheck complains about each new version of dev-lisp/sbcl:
UseFlagWithoutDeps: version 2.4.1: special small-files USE flag without
effect on dependencies: [ unicode ]
The USE flag "unicode" in the sbcl ebuild has nothing to do with
installing / not installing any files, small or
26 matches
Mail list logo
