Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
> > We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are
> > touching.
> > For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around, where the newer ebuilds
> > are fixed, but old ones are no
maillog: 31/01/2006-12:15:00(-0800): Donnie Berkholz types
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > | > For packages in the second group, not using a U
Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Is
> having INPUT_DEVICES and the like following the same scheme
> (ie, input_devices.desc) acceptable?
As long as I can still get the pretty output with -vp. =)
Thanks,
Donnie
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 22:39, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 31 January 2006 06:31, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > 1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
> > > values, and documenting them all and keeping t
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 02:28, Mark Loeser wrote:
> Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps
> > being
> > fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it
> > against
> > whatever bug is reques
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 11:17:49PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:03:46 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > I'd prefer "either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc" personally. But
> | >
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all.
Markus has been contributing to gentoo through bugzilla and bugdays for
a few months and have now finally joined the ranks of official Gentoo
developers. Markus is going to help with netmon related ebuilds.
Markus tells us about himself:
"I'm a 23 year old geek
On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:03:46 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > I'd prefer "either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc" personally. But
| > yeah, that's a nice solution.
|
| You mean either "/usr/share/doc" or "/e
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> | On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> | > For packages in the second group, not using a USE flag is silly.
>> |
>> | I take it
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 10:53:28PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I'd prefer "either /etc or /etc and /usr/share/doc" personally. But
> yeah, that's a nice solution.
You mean either "/usr/share/doc" or "/etc/ and /usr/share/doc"?
./Brix
--
Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Metadis
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:15:00 -0800 Donnie Berkholz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I finally came up with an idea for this that satisfies my desire to
| not recompile the package to get e.g. a logrotate file. Have the flag
| control whether it's installed to /etc or to /usr/share/doc.
|
| Thoughts?
On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 12:15:00PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> I finally came up with an idea for this that satisfies my desire to not
> recompile the package to get e.g. a logrotate file. Have the flag
> control whether it's installed to /etc or to /usr/share/doc.
That's actually a pretty goo
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > For packages in the second group, not using a USE flag is silly.
> |
> | I take it you are agreeing we should have
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>Basically, if the package *requires* something to function, such as a
>cron script, then it should install it unconditionally. If it does not,
>then it shouldn't install it. Having to change USE to get a stupid
>cron/logrotate file is definitely not the best option. Why
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 15:47 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Not really. For some packages, cron files must always be installed for
> proper operation. For some packages, cron files are strictly optional
> extras for features that many users will not want. For many it's
> somewhere in between. For p
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:41:36 -0800 Donnie Berkholz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Mark Loeser wrote:
| > We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are
| > touching. For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around,
| > where the newer ebuilds are fixed, but old ones are not.
Mark Loeser wrote:
> Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps
>> being
>> fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it
>> against
>> whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving some
Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps being
> fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it against
> whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving something to
> stable that you know
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:06:35 + "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > | What is the "cost" you are referring to specifically? I think I
| > | know but I'd like a specific definition.
| >
| > 1. Management. For example
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
heya,
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 15:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | What is the "cost" you are referring to specifically? I think I know
> | but I'd like a specific definition.
>
> 1. Management. For example, handling etc-update.
That is surely a "cos
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:03:38 + "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:31, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > See, you're not really taking into account the cost of sticking
| > files in /etc. For packages where an etc entry is low cost, it's
| > already do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
heya,
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 12:31, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> See, you're not really taking into account the cost of sticking files
> in /etc. For packages where an etc entry is low cost, it's already
> done.
What is the "cost" you are referring
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 06:31, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > 1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
> > values, and documenting them all and keeping the list up to date would
> > be extremely difficult.
>
> "More p
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:11:49 + "Benjamin Smee (strerror)"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| While I understand various developers concerns about cluttering /etc
| (especially embedded), I don't see why this should stop the policy of
| writting ebuilds that work and have expected tools around them.
|
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Heya,
I noticed the logrotate USE flag thread recently and did a bit of reading on
the problem (ie read all the previous threads) as well as touching on the
whole cron USE flag thoughts as well, and it struck me that it is really odd
that this enti
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:31:55 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > 1. Because for things like LINGUAS, there are arbitrarily many legal
| > values, and documenting them all and keeping the list up to date
| > would be extremely difficult.
|
| "More precisely, how should they be documen
On Monday 30 January 2006 20:54, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:46:28 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Monday 30 January 2006 16:43, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 06:17:36 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
> | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On Tuesday 31 January 2006 13:49, Joshua Jackson wrote:
> Mark Loeser gentoo.org> writes:
> > Donnie Berkholz gentoo.org> said:
> > > Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > > > The patch now has the debugging output and x11-base/xorg-x11 check
> > > > removed.
> > >
> > > Excellent. Works perfectly. Since we
The last change: 401 up to 406. Yes, it actually got worse. This is
caused by artifacts fixed by the recent portage 2.1 revision bump,
because I know some apps were fixed.
Progress graph:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/broken_modular/broken_modular_progress.png
Latest list:
http://dev.gentoo.or
Joshua Jackson wrote:
> To quote one of the ebuild-quiz questions: You wish to make a change
> to an ebuild, but you checked the ChangeLogs and metadata.xml and it
> appears to be maintained by someone else. How should you proceed?
>
> A general response that is obtained from the documentation so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Joshua Jackson wrote:
>> In the oldest version of the package (as all these were), I don't
>> see much point in the change. They will be removed within a
>> fairly short amount of time.
>
> Fairly short meaning what, 6 months?
31 matches
Mail list logo
