On L, 2008-09-06 at 00:33 +, Duncan wrote:
> Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Fri, 05 Sep
> 2008 21:47:59 +0200:
>
> >> 2) Should I file stabilization requests on software that works mostly
> >> as in everything that I use it for normall
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2008-09-07 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
dev-cpp/libwefts2008-09-02 13:28:55 darkside
dev-util/bazaar 2008-09-02 13:32:59 darkside
app-i18n/kon2
Jan Kundrát wrote:
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
Some members of the KDE team have been talking for some time about
having a FHS compliant install (define KDE prefix as /usr instead of
/usr/kde/).
What are benefits of such a change? What happens when KDE release a
version breaking ABI (like
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
Some members of the KDE team have been talking for some time about
having a FHS compliant install (define KDE prefix as /usr instead of
/usr/kde/).
What are benefits of such a change? What happens when KDE release a
version breaking ABI (like "KDE 5")?
Right
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
Dale wrote:
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
Dale wrote:
Philip Webb wrote:
080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem.
Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ?
Gentoo is not like other distro
080907 Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> The slotting of KDE 3.* and KDE 4.* was never a question
> but whether we really need to keep slotting of minor KDE versions
> in the new 4.* line, i.e. KDE 4.1 and 4.2 slotted on the same system.
Yes, I understood that (smile).
> It is no real issue to be able t
Dale wrote:
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
Dale wrote:
Philip Webb wrote:
080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem.
Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ?
Gentoo is not like other distros & sometimes needs to fin
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
Dale wrote:
Philip Webb wrote:
080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem.
Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ?
Gentoo is not like other distros & sometimes needs to find its own way
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:46:45 -0400
> "Marcus D. Hanwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > The proposal is not designed to replace all cases. It's designed to
>> > replace the common 50%.
>> >
>> I personally agree with seve
On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:46:45 -0400
"Marcus D. Hanwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The proposal is not designed to replace all cases. It's designed to
> > replace the common 50%.
> >
> I personally agree with several others who have replied to this
> thread. The reduction in lines of code/cha
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:31:37 +0200 (CEST)
Vaeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Santiago M. Mola wrote:
Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DEFAULT_SRC_CONFIGURE_USE_{WITHS,ENABLES}
Dale wrote:
Philip Webb wrote:
080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem.
Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ?
Gentoo is not like other distros & sometimes needs to find its own way.
Given the well-known pr
Philip Webb wrote:
080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem.
Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ?
Gentoo is not like other distros & sometimes needs to find its own way.
Given the well-known problems with K
On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:31:37 +0200 (CEST)
Vaeth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> > Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Thomas Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>DEFAULT_SRC_CONFIGURE_USE_{WITHS,ENABLES}
> > >>DEFAULT_SRC_CONFIGURE
Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thomas Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>DEFAULT_SRC_CONFIGURE_USE_{WITHS,ENABLES}
> >>DEFAULT_SRC_CONFIGURE_EXTRA_PARAMS
Essentially, this is the suggestion to replace the flexible shell cod
On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 17:24:55 +0400
Peter Volkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> В Вск, 07/09/2008 в 02:05 +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto пишет:
> > Our first attempt was to use a multislot use flag[1]. According to
> > that flag, we would set the SLOT and the PREFIX for the install.
> > That has th
Olivier Crête wrote:
On Sun, 2008-09-07 at 02:05 +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
I've been thinking on a different method. With this method [3], we
would keep using the . slots (4.1, 4.2, etc) so we also
wouldn't break the invariancy. We would allow users to select whether
to have an
Hi,
As I'm longer using biew in any way and don't really have any interest
in maintaining it, I'm looking for someone to take it over. The package
has no open bugs and is seldom updated, but could use a version bump.
If you are willing to maintain it, feel free to remove me from
metadata.xml and
Josh Saddler wrote:
In fairness, their priority is whatever they *want* to do. No one has
the right to dictate what they should and should not be doing -- except
themselves. Maybe figuring out the install path is a precursor to all that?
Couldn't agree more that (within reason) the ebuild te
В Вск, 07/09/2008 в 02:05 +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto пишет:
> Our first attempt was to use a multislot use flag[1]. According to that
> flag, we would set the SLOT and the PREFIX for the install. That has the
> a very important problem - it breaks the invariancy of the SLOT and as
> thus bee
Philip Webb wrote:
I really do appreciate the hard volunteer work the KDE team donates
& have nothing but thanks to them all, but shouldn't your priority be
to get KDE 4.1 into 'testing', so that users can actually try it out ?
There's also 3.5.10 , which has been released, but isn't in Gentoo ye
080907 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> ignoring FHS ... are not valid solutions to this problem.
Why ? Who is demanding FHS compliance & for what reasons ?
Gentoo is not like other distros & sometimes needs to find its own way.
Given the well-known problems with KDE 4.0 & (still) 4.1 ,
I'ld l
22 matches
Mail list logo
