On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 02:51:26AM -0500, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> Like in here?
>
> app-doc/halibut/halibut-0.9.ebuild: BUILDDIR="${S}/build" \
> net-dns/maradns/maradns-1.0.27.ebuild:BUILDDIR=${S}/build \
> net-dns/maradns/maradns-1.0.32.ebuild:
On Monday 26 December 2005 09:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
> > it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
>
> which we've already established quite clearly as something we wish to
Am Sonntag, den 25.12.2005, 14:00 -0600 schrieb Jory A. Pratt:
>
> eclass: http://dev.gentoo.org/~anarchy/eclass/mozextension.eclass
> firefox-bin:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~anarchy/ebuilds/mozilla-firefox-bin-1.5-r2.ebuild
> firefox :
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~anarchy/ebuilds/mozilla-firefox-1.5-r5
>> Currently there are quite a few ebuilds in the tree that execute dodoc or
>> dohtml for files that do not exist. I think it would be nice to have
>> ebuilds die if this is the case. To not break current ebuilds this would
>> only happen with FEATURES="stricter".
Sigh... There are already bugs
Alle 13:50, sabato 24 dicembre 2005, Peter ha scritto:
> Also, I find it absolutely fascinating that the only people against this
> concept are devs, and the only people for it are users. Remember that
> users are your customers. Every effort should be made to keep them happy.
As a user, I wouldn'
Doug Goldstein wrote:
the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
crap...
./default-linux/x86/2005.0/make.defaults:USE="alsa apm arts avi berkdb
bitmap-fo nts crypt cups eds emboss encode fortran foomaticdb gdbm gif
gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 imlib ipv6 jpeg kde l
On Monday 26 December 2005 03:28, Chris White wrote:
> I'm not sure if we're on the same page as far as the target audience of
> this change. The target audience is developers/those with strict in their
> features.
Actually "stricter", and there are way too many people to put that in without
know
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Doug,
Doug Goldstein schrieb:
|>>the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
|>>crap...
Buzzwords like "Stupid,INSANE,crap,bitching" beside: There are projects
which need these combinations of USE flags like Releng. They a
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 03:28, Chris White wrote:
>
>>I'm not sure if we're on the same page as far as the target audience of
>>this change. The target audience is developers/those with strict in their
>>features.
>
> Actually "stricter", and there are way t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jakub Moc schrieb:
|
|>>Currently there are quite a few ebuilds in the tree that execute dodoc or
|>>dohtml for files that do not exist. I think it would be nice to have
|>>ebuilds die if this is the case. To not break current ebuilds this would
|>>on
Jakub Moc wrote:
>
>>>Currently there are quite a few ebuilds in the tree that execute dodoc or
>>>dohtml for files that do not exist. I think it would be nice to have
>>>ebuilds die if this is the case. To not break current ebuilds this would
>>>only happen with FEATURES="stricter".
>
>
> Sigh.
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
I'm not sure if we're on the same page as far as the target audience of
this change. The target audience is developers/those with strict in their
features.
Actually "stricter", and there are way too many people to put that in without
knowing what that do... or
Bastiaan Visser wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 09:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>>On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>>
>>>well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
>>>it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
>>
>>which we've already established quite cl
Hi all.
Jörg Bornkessel (hd_brummy) hails from Berlin, Germany and joined the
Gentoo team about two weeks ago to help with Video Disk Recorder related
ebuilds.
Outside Gentoo Jörg is self-employed, doing webdesign and fixing
computers. Jörg also enjoys spending time with his Harley motorcycle.
P
Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 02:51:26AM -0500, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote:
> > Like in here?
> >
> > app-doc/halibut/halibut-0.9.ebuild: BUILDDIR="${S}/build" \
> > net-dns/maradns/maradns-1.0.27.ebuild:BUILDDIR=${S}/build
Petteri Räty wrote:
> R Hill wrote:
>
>>Daniel Ahlberg wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>* if ebuild installs COPYING and/or INSTALL into doc.
>>
>>
>>Is this actually important? There are a hell of a lot of ebuilds that fail
>>under this rule. I'd like to start filing patches for some of the packages in
>>thi
On Monday 26 December 2005 20:01, Jakub Moc wrote:
> >> Currently there are quite a few ebuilds in the tree that execute dodoc
> >> or dohtml for files that do not exist. I think it would be nice to have
> >> ebuilds die if this is the case. To not break current ebuilds this would
> >> only happen
26.12.2005, 14:28:12, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 20:01, Jakub Moc wrote:
>> >> Currently there are quite a few ebuilds in the tree that execute dodoc
>> >> or dohtml for files that do not exist. I think it would be nice to have
>> >> ebuilds die if this is the case. To not b
Petteri R??ty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Petteri R??ty wrote:
> > R Hill wrote:
> >>Daniel Ahlberg wrote:
> >>>* if ebuild installs COPYING and/or INSTALL into doc.
> >>
> >>Is this actually important? There are a hell of a lot of ebuilds that fail
> >>under this rule. I'd like to start filing
Drake Wyrm wrote:
> Petteri R??ty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Petteri R??ty wrote:
>>
>>>R Hill wrote:
>>>
Daniel Ahlberg wrote:
>* if ebuild installs COPYING and/or INSTALL into doc.
Is this actually important? There are a hell of a lot of ebuilds that fail
under thi
The GDP does very good work and i think you did your part to make this
happen. Thanks!
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 04:44:28PM +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> With kind regards (yes, that's what "Wkr" stands for),
Wkr, too :-)
Wernfried
--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gento
On Monday 26 December 2005 15:02, Petteri Räty wrote:
> It's just that usually the
> INSTALL file is not really useful unless you are manually installing the
> package from sources and then you will have the INSTALL file in there
> with the sources.
Yeah, and in that case I usually judge it useless
On Monday 26 December 2005 13:59, Simon Stelling wrote:
> > Actually "stricter", and there are way too many people to put that in
> > without knowing what that do... or is it a default nowadays, I'm not even
> > sure.
> You're mixing up 'strict' with 'stricter'.
Well if I'm mixing up, someone moved
On Monday 26 December 2005 14:57, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> You're going to be hard-pressed to get any kind of consensus on this
> issue. Many dev seems to feel that the license belongs there. In some
> cases the COPYING, LICENSE, and/or INSTALL files contain, not boilerplate
> drivel, but actually uniqu
On 12/26/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 13:59, Simon Stelling wrote:
> > > Actually "stricter", and there are way too many people to put that in
> > > without knowing what that do... or is it a default nowadays, I'm not even
> > > sure.
> > You
and my bad.
I am not yet awake.
It died cause of runpaths on strict, it just showed both, and I wasn't
thinking when I sent earlier email...
On 12/26/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/26/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Monday 26 December 2005 13:59
Welcome aboard and have a good time!
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 00:09:57 -0500 Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of
| this crap...
No, you just don't understand how they work. It's not an issue of
"is foo important". It's an issue of "for packages with optional foo
su
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
please help me to welcome Peter Gordon aka codergeek42, our latest
addition to the ranks of Gentoo Developers. And someone please explain
to him how to secure his bum in SpanKY's immediate vicinity ;-)
Peter is a global moderator in the Gentoo
Dale wrote:
> I'm not a dev but I can see both sides. I learned why some things are
> being pulled in that I couldn't figure out. I use KDE but do not want
> Gnome and it appears that I have some gnome stuff installed and didn't
> know it, because of the USE line. I guess they are in there becau
Petteri Räty wrote:
>>aint it worth it to mention "-*" in the handbook ?
If you make a decision, http://bugs.gentoo.org/ please.
> And then mentioning stuff like pam that almost everyone wants? There are
> also things that should be on by default.
If it should be on by default, let's add it to t
On Monday 26 December 2005 17:32, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> If it should be on by default, let's add it to the profile, don't ask
> users to turn it on themselves.
That s what it s done now. But -* would disable it...
--
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Ge
26.12.2005, 16:35:33, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 00:09:57 -0500 Doug Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of
> | this crap...
> No, you just don't understand how they work. It's not an issue of
> "is foo impo
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:57:17 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| alsa - this does not make most sense definitely, this horrible thing
| needs to die.
Why? On x86, alsa is the least broken sound system, and on x86, the
target for the default profiles is desktops, and most desktops have
sou
Doug Goldstein wrote:
the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
crap...
./default-linux/x86/2005.0/make.defaults:USE="alsa apm arts avi berkdb
bitmap-fo nts crypt cups eds emboss encode fortran foomaticdb gdbm gif
gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 imlib ipv6 jpeg kde l
26.12.2005, 18:07:45, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:57:17 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | alsa - this does not make most sense definitely, this horrible thing
> | needs to die.
> Why? On x86, alsa is the least broken sound system, and on x86, the
> target for the
Petteri Räty wrote:
Bastiaan Visser wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 09:33, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 26 December 2005 02:24, Doug Goldstein wrote:
well there is always USE enabling... (i.e. When I emerge x11-libs/qt,
it'll turn on the "qt" USE flag)
which we
Simon Stelling wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote:
>
>> the USE defaults are a bit INSANE... We need to get rid of some of this
>> crap...
>>
>>
>> ./default-linux/x86/2005.0/make.defaults:USE="alsa apm arts avi berkdb
>> bitmap-fo nts crypt cups eds emboss encode fortran foomaticdb gdbm gif
>> gnome g
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 17:57 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
> eds - please, fix the ebuilds properly instead of throwing the thing on
> everyone. This has already caused numerous invalid bugs with people
> wondering why the heck portage wants to emerge gnome with USE="-gtk -gnome"
>
How do you suggest t
On Monday 26 December 2005 19:36, Joe McCann wrote:
> This whole thread seems to have come from a
> misunderstanding of how use.defaults work and 20 min of boredom.
use.defaults are based on the idea that having an ebuild installed should
activate the relevant use flag(s) behind the users back.
On Monday 26 December 2005 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Because it makes sense. For any application which has IUSE="emboss",
> chances are emboss should be enabled. There was a long discussion about
> this on the -user list a while back where I ended up posting a
> newbie-friendly explanation of
Jakub Moc posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below,
on Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:53:55 +0100:
>
> 26.12.2005, 18:07:45, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:57:17 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> | alsa - this does not make most sense definitely, this horrible thing
>> |
26.12.2005, 19:36:23, Joe McCann wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 17:57 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
>> eds - please, fix the ebuilds properly instead of throwing the thing on
>> everyone. This has already caused numerous invalid bugs with people
>> wondering why the heck portage wants to emerge gnome
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 20:03:42 +0100 Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Monday 26 December 2005 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Because it makes sense. For any application which has IUSE="emboss",
| > chances are emboss should be enabled. There was a long discussion
| > about this on th
On Saturday 24 December 2005 02:04, Brian Harring wrote:
> dev-lang/python[tcltk]
> ^^^ need that atom resolved with use flag tcltk enabled
I think that's exactly what someone told me months ago. :)
> >=sys-apps/portage-2.0[sandbox,!build]
>
> ^^^ need >=portage-2.0 merged with sandbox on, build
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 21:09:31 +0100 Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I wonder if portage deals fine with subtle dependency
| incompatibilities, when one package has foo[!bar] and another one
| foo[bar] as dependency and spits out a reasonable error message to
| apply mutual blockers.
If
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 20:24 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
> 26.12.2005, 19:36:23, Joe McCann wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 17:57 +0100, Jakub Moc wrote:
>
> >> eds - please, fix the ebuilds properly instead of throwing the thing on
> >> everyone. This has already caused numerous invalid bugs with
On Monday 26 December 2005 08:24, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Petteri Räty wrote:
> > R Hill wrote:
> >>Daniel Ahlberg wrote:
> >>>* if ebuild installs COPYING and/or INSTALL into doc.
> >>
> >>Is this actually important? There are a hell of a lot of ebuilds that
> >> fail under this rule. I'd like to
On Monday 26 December 2005 08:24, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 02:51:26AM -0500, Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-
wrote:
> > > Like in here?
> > >
> > > app-doc/halibut/halibut-0.9.ebuild: BUILDDIR="${S}/build" \
> > > net-dns/mara
OK, so because every 3rd gnome user is not able to add the proper use flag
to make.conf, every non-gnome user is stuck with investigating and putting
-eds into make.conf to avoid pulling in gnome crap. Wonderful.
Yes, I am ranting, because this kind of use flags basically pulls in huge
number or
On Monday 26 December 2005 20:24, Jakub Moc wrote:
> exactly the same thing with motif - would
> someone explain why the heck do do we need this thing in make.defaults?
Because people emerges xpdf waiting for xpdf binary and they won't find it
with -motif, as it requires motif integration, but I t
26.12.2005, 22:21:14, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petteno wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 20:24, Jakub Moc wrote:
>> exactly the same thing with motif - would
>> someone explain why the heck do do we need this thing in make.defaults?
> Because people emerges xpdf waiting for xpdf binary and they won't
Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > So, everyone that has a binary package in the tree, I would appreciate it if
> > you could put the sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 depend into your package if
> > necessary.
>
> Well, you can tell I didn't exactly think about
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote:
>
> For the record, the eds flag was
> added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or
> complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no
> evolution-data-server integration, and then be bummed when they had to
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 15:19:47 -0700 Lares Moreau
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Is it feasible and or useful to have a 'meta-flag' that that enables
| all the 'necessary' USE flags for a given group of packages? So
| something like USE='meta-'.
USE flags are for things that're optional, not things
Lares Moreau wrote:
On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote:
For the record, the eds flag was
added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or
complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no
evolution-data-server integration, and then be bummed w
Fellow Gentooers,
Here is a draft of an enhancement proposal that should allow upstream
information to be included in metadata.xml:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~vanquirius/glep-0099.txt
It is authored by ciaranm and me (vanquirius).
Please comment :-).
Cheers,
Marcelo
--
Marcelo Góes
[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:11:46 -0200 Marcelo Góes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Here is a draft of an enhancement proposal that should allow upstream
| information to be included in metadata.xml:
|
| http://dev.gentoo.org/~vanquirius/glep-0099.txt
Should show up in nicely rendered HTML here within a
On Monday 26 December 2005 21:28, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> If they're purely in DEPEND, that one isn't even an incompatability.
Right. But it's not that unlikely to see such a corner case sooner or later
and it would be good if Portage catches it, instead spitting out a weird
message, leaving th
That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
keep this info out of the sync-tree?
I do not see why this is necessary to be in the tree - we can do fine
with a webbased database for that.
- Stefan
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:33:13 +0100 Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| The problem is not the SLOT change, but to build "foo" depending on
| "bar" against KDE X, while bar is built against KDE Y. "foo" and
| "bar" support all slotted KDE versions, but they need to be build
| against the sam
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:46:49AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > The existing syntax is just as extensible. Up the EABI revision, and
> | > start adding new syntax as needed.
> |
> | EAPI has nothing to do with the consistency of the syntax. Getting it
> | once right, is what you usually cal
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
| keep this info out of the sync-tree?
Learn to use the rsync exclude list.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain)
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 16:57:07 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Not saying it's a great idea, but EAPI exists to provide immediate
| transition to incompatible changes instead of the usual "work out a
| semi backwards compatible way, don't use it for 6 months, then deal
| with the
On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
> | keep this info out of the sync-tree?
>
> Learn to use the rsync exclude list.
>
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:59:34AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
> | keep this info out of the sync-tree?
>
> Learn to use the rsync exclude
On 12/26/05, Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
> > | keep this info ou
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 01:03:49AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 16:57:07 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | Not saying it's a great idea, but EAPI exists to provide immediate
> | transition to incompatible changes instead of the usual "work out a
> | semi
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 17:17:54 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 01:03:49AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 16:57:07 -0800 Brian Harring
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | Not saying it's a great idea, but EAPI exists to provide
| > | imm
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 08:12:03PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> On 12/26/05, Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > | That will increase the
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 09:09:31PM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Saturday 24 December 2005 02:04, Brian Harring wrote:
> > dev-lang/python[tcltk]
> > ^^^ need that atom resolved with use flag tcltk enabled
>
> I think that's exactly what someone told me months ago. :)
>
> > >=sys-apps/portage
Lares Moreau wrote:
I'm relatively ignorant of USE Flag intricacies, so please forgive me if
things don't 'fit'.
Ditto for me. I have a question or two. I have servers that have no
GUI at all. I just use them to run folding on. Would I benefit from
puting in USE="-*" in my USE line?
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 01:46, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> You solve this either by SLOTting bar and making each bar SLOT use a
> SLOT dep upon KDE, or by using USE flags and [use]:slot deps.
It's not a that uncommon case and would lead to dozens, very likely (depending
on the future development
Lares Moreau wrote:
There are already complaints about syncs taking to long.
As a dial-up user, I may be one of them. Sorry. It takes me 30 to 45
minutes to sync. That's if it has few changes. It took almost a hour
when KDE was upgraded. This does NOT include downloading any pac
Stefan Schweizer wrote:
That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we please
keep this info out of the sync-tree?
I do not see why this is necessary to be in the tree - we can do fine
with a webbased database for that.
The additional time is not significant as this will be a
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:07:29 -0700 Lares Moreau
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | That will increase the sync time for all of our users - can we
| > | pl
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 02:31:02AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 01:46, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > You solve this either by SLOTting bar and making each bar SLOT use a
> > SLOT dep upon KDE, or by using USE flags and [use]:slot deps.
>
> It's not a that uncommon case a
Marcelo Góes wrote:
Fellow Gentooers,
Here is a draft of an enhancement proposal that should allow upstream
information to be included in metadata.xml:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~vanquirius/glep-0099.txt
It is authored by ciaranm and me (vanquirius).
Please comment :-).
Will those new tags su
On 12/26/05, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 08:12:03PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > On 12/26/05, Lares Moreau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 00:59 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 01:45:00 +0100 Stefan Schweizer
>
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:43:19 +0100 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Will those new tags support the "restrict" attribute?
Is restrict something that's in use and working, or did it never get
off the drawing board?
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain)
Mail
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:29, Brian Harring wrote:
> So... basically, your concern is with the resolver, not use/slot deps
> syntax.
I did not say that this would have anything to do with the syntax. Am I right
to extract from your words that we get rid of ~arch users complains about
up/do
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 02:43:19 +0100 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Will those new tags support the "restrict" attribute?
Is restrict something that's in use and working, or did it never get
off the drawing board?
Well, it's listed in metadata.dtd, so any packag
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:23, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Nooo! That's exactly the point I was making. Carsten is assuming that
> by using [slot:bar] syntax, no backwards incompatibility will be
> introduced by adding a new [fish:] key.
Nooo! ;) I said it would look more consistent, than always
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 03:01:13AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:29, Brian Harring wrote:
> > So... basically, your concern is with the resolver, not use/slot deps
> > syntax.
>
> I did not say that this would have anything to do with the syntax. Am I right
> to ex
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:42, Brian Harring wrote:
> Well, we all seem to be missing the issue, so please spell it out
> clearly (rather then "it's going to get bad"). Didn't grok it from
> the previous email, so spell it out please :)
Just did so in the answer on your other email.
Carsten
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 03:07:52AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:23, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Nooo! That's exactly the point I was making. Carsten is assuming that
> > by using [slot:bar] syntax, no backwards incompatibility will be
> > introduced by adding a new [
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:11, Brian Harring wrote:
> Either way, still not totally following your complaint, thus an actual
> example would help (easiest to assume I'm a moron, and start at that
> level of explanation).
O.k.
1. You have KDE 3.4 and Digikam (version doesn't matter) installed
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:11, Brian Harring wrote:
> Never said anything about 2.1 + resolver enhancements (no clue where
> that one came from). Merely commenting on your raised issues about
> use/slot deps.
From your words. Thanks for destroying my hope in two sentences. ;p
So we add this d
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 03:32:04AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:11, Brian Harring wrote:
> > Either way, still not totally following your complaint, thus an actual
> > example would help (easiest to assume I'm a moron, and start at that
> > level of explanation).
>
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 03:36:00AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:11, Brian Harring wrote:
> > Never said anything about 2.1 + resolver enhancements (no clue where
> > that one came from). Merely commenting on your raised issues about
> > use/slot deps.
>
> From you
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:40, Brian Harring wrote:
> The version of digikam being merged requires slot=3.5- it should be
> depending on libk* slot=3.5, also, no?
No! It (and also its dependencies) can be built against each 3.x slot.
> As long as the information is represented dependency wise
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 03:54:38 +0100 Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:40, Brian Harring wrote:
| > The version of digikam being merged requires slot=3.5- it should be
| > depending on libk* slot=3.5, also, no?
|
| No! It (and also its dependencies) can be bu
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 03:54:38AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 03:40, Brian Harring wrote:
> > The version of digikam being merged requires slot=3.5- it should be
> > depending on libk* slot=3.5, also, no?
>
> No! It (and also its dependencies) can be built against e
Lares Moreau wrote:
>On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 12:36 -0600, Joe McCann wrote:
>
>
>>For the record, the eds flag was
>>added as a default flag because every 3rd gnome user would file bugs or
>>complain via forums because they installed gnome, found no
>>evolution-data-server integration, and then be
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> It occurs to me that this could be (to an extent) accomplished by having
> a few more "specialized" subprofiles for x86: base, desktop, gnome, and kde.
>
> base - as the name implies, a _basic_ starting point... very similar to
>
Brian Harring wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
>
>
>>It occurs to me that this could be (to an extent) accomplished by having
>>a few more "specialized" subprofiles for x86: base, desktop, gnome, and kde.
>>
>>base - as the name implies, a _basic_ startin
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:10:04AM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 11:28:17PM -0500, Chandler Carruth wrote:
> >>3) there is _no_ functionality added by any of this, only
> >>"user-friendliness" after a fashion, and as such, perhaps it should all
Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Monday 26 December 2005 14:57, Drake Wyrm wrote:
>> You're going to be hard-pressed to get any kind of consensus on this
>> issue. Many dev seems to feel that the license belongs there. In some
>> cases the COPYING, LICENSE, and/or INSTALL files contain, not boilerplate
>
On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:01, R Hill wrote:
> AFAIK most licenses need to be included with the distribution of the
> source, not installed on the system after compilation. But I could be
> wrong too.
anyone who installs a program in portage already has a copy of the license on
their system
On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 02:08:25AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 December 2005 02:01, R Hill wrote:
> > AFAIK most licenses need to be included with the distribution of the
> > source, not installed on the system after compilation. But I could be
> > wrong too.
>
> anyone who insta
1 - 100 of 104 matches
Mail list logo
