Ryan Hill wrote:
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 22:24:35 +0200
Jeroen Roovers<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please people,
if you want to get something tested, then don't mask it.
Um... no? One thing that package.mask has always been used for is
temporarily masking a package until it can be tested an
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 05:07:21PM +0100, Steve Long wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 17:38:11 +0200
> > Ulrich Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > By the way, do we really want to special case eapi-2 in every
> >> > eclass ? That's lot of code duplication and will ge
On E, 2008-10-06 at 03:46 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> With USE="doc" the GNOME packages behave like what you expect but it's
> the USE="-doc" case that's in question here. With USE="-doc" you don't
> get any use flags installed normally and if it's in the tarball and is
> always installed then the
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 17:38:11 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > By the way, do we really want to special case eapi-2 in every
>> > eclass ? That's lot of code duplication and will get even worse
>> > when we'll reach eapi-42. That would have been cool to
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 17:07:21 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's illegal, according to PMS. It also won't work with Paludis,
> > since phase function definitions aren't made available until just
> > before that phase executes (there is a reason for this -- it
> > provides us with a
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> Indeed; different names could be given to different implementations of
> the same thing, but that might completely kill the point of abstracting
> it.
> Maybe eclasses should die on unknown eapi; the fact is I really hate the
> current way it's done when switching an ebuild
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Doug Goldstein kirjoitti:
>
>> As some people may have already noticed, I have recently added OpenRC
>> 0.3.0 to the tree. This will be the stabilization candidate in
>> approximately 30 days.
>>
>> I encourage everyone to kick the tires on this one.
>>
>> Current Bugs: *ht
Duncan wrote:
> Thomas Sachau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> excerpted below, on Sun, 05 Oct 2008 14:24:55 +0200:
>
>> I just had a user in bugzilla who thought, the developer profile would
>> be for software developers, not just for gentoo developers. Probably he
>> is not the
Robert Buchholz wrote:
> On Sunday 05 October 2008, Thilo Bangert wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 03:44:20 -0700
>> >
>> > "Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > Either we need special cases to declare that it no longer has a
>> > > homepag
El lun, 06-10-2008 a las 23:13 +, Duncan escribió:
> Jeremy Olexa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> excerpted below, on Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:07:14 -0500:
>
> > AFAIK, it is incorrect right now to exclude s390, arm, sh, etc on
> > stablereqs right now..But, I ask this question to
10 matches
Mail list logo
