> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, ABCD wrote:
> Personally, I would use
> find "${D}" -type f \! -newermt "@${stamp1}" -exec \
> touch -c -d "@${stamp1}" {} +
> and
> find "${D}" -type f -newermt "@${stamp2}" -exec \
> touch -c -d "@${stamp2}" {} +
> to avoid an unneeded call
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> But as far as I can see, something along the lines of the following
> two commands [1] should be all that is needed:
>
> find "${D}" -type f \( -newermt "@${stamp1}" -o -print0 \) \
> | ${XARGS} -0 touch -c -d "@${s
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Petteri Räty wrote:
> For most features the block is the need for Portage to implement the
> feature. If I read the thread correctly, Portage already implements
> what is wanted here so it's just a matter of agreeing on the
> specification.
Not completely. Portage prese
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christian Faulhammer schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> René 'Necoro' Neumann :
>> So I'd vote for switching back to using normal checkouts (or branches
>> - they don't really differ in bzr for that matter).
>
> My tests with Bazaar 1.13.1 show roughly the same tim
Stefan Knoblich schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> we'd like to have Willikins join #gentoo.de, so here's my official request :)
> Thanks in advance.
>
> (This is a -nomail subscription, you'll have to CC me.)
>
> Stefan
>
> (stkn @ #gentoo.de)
>
>
ok from me for this request.
--
Thomas Sachau
Gentoo Linu
Hi,
we'd like to have Willikins join #gentoo.de, so here's my official request :)
Thanks in advance.
(This is a -nomail subscription, you'll have to CC me.)
Stefan
(stkn @ #gentoo.de)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is just a quick announcement to let everyone know that Xorg
> 1.5.3 and pretty much all X libraries and apps which have been
> sitting in ~arch for months/years are finally going to go stable,
> replacing our old,
On Monday 30 March 2009, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> > So far, we've got this, by agreement of the Council:
> >
> > * There will be a default src_install in EAPI 3
> > * It will have a DOCS variable, or something along those lines.
> >
> > I'd like to suggest the following too
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 19:19:48 +0100
Sébastien Fabbro wrote:
> It's a bit of overtuning, but it could allow features such
> re-installing package with switching the doc flag without
> the need of re-compiling everything, and trivialize the src_install.
Anything involving partial recompiles is way b
On Monday March 30 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> It, along with the half dozen other variants floating around, are good
> starting points, but we need a final solution.
>
Yet another one: how about building/installing the documentation into
two separate functions doc_compile and doc_install?
It's a
Hi all,
This is just a quick announcement to let everyone know that Xorg 1.5.3
and pretty much all X libraries and apps which have been sitting in
~arch for months/years are finally going to go stable, replacing our
old, rusty and busted 1.3 X server.
Arch Teams have received the final packa
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 21:07:42 +0300
Petteri Räty wrote:
> should have || die where appropriate
It's EAPI 3, so it doesn't need it.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
> I am aware of the fact that we are late for EAPI 3 (partly because I
> didn't expect that the change would require an EAPI bump). Question to
> the council: is it still possible to include this? Considering that
> there is a lot of breakage, as well as strange workarounds
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:33:48 +0200
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> Why do you want to force -j1 here?
>
> Because any package using an old automake has a non-parallel-safe
> install.
>
I would rather have detection in place for old automake in the build
system and not force -
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> So far, we've got this, by agreement of the Council:
>
> * There will be a default src_install in EAPI 3
> * It will have a DOCS variable, or something along those lines.
>
> I'd like to suggest the following too:
>
> * If DOCS is explicitly specified, it is an error if
Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> [- c ] nsplugin - Builds plugins for Netscape compatible browsers
>
> [- c ] nsplugin (media-video/totem):
> Build media plugin for Mozilla-based browsers such as
> www-client/mozilla-firefox
>
> Anyone against using the local description for the global one and
> e
Daniel Pielmeier wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb am 30.03.2009 18:43:
>> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:33:48 +0200
>> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>>> else
>>> for x in AUTHORS ChangeLog NEWS README; do
>>> if [ -e ${x} ]; then
>> Is -e really better than -s?
>>
>
> I think
Ciaran McCreesh schrieb am 30.03.2009 18:43:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:33:48 +0200
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> else
>> for x in AUTHORS ChangeLog NEWS README; do
>> if [ -e ${x} ]; then
>
> Is -e really better than -s?
>
I think -s should be used here. I have
Am Montag, den 30.03.2009, 18:05 +0200 schrieb Peter Alfredsen:
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:40:14 +0100
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > No, an EAPI bump is necessary. Older (post-EAPI) Portage versions do
> > something different, so any ebuild relying upon particular behaviour
> > is already broken.
Hi,
one local USE flag nsplugin only differs slightly from the global one:
[- c ] nsplugin - Builds plugins for Netscape compatible browsers
[- c ] nsplugin (media-video/totem):
Build media plugin for Mozilla-based browsers such as
www-client/mozilla-firefox
Anyone against using the local des
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> On behalf of the Lisp project (which includes the Emacs subproject)
> I'd like to propose that preservation of mtimes be included as a
> requirement of EAPI3.
> [...]
> Background: Dynamic languages such as Common Lisp and Elisp, but
>
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
>> No, an EAPI bump is necessary. Older (post-EAPI) Portage versions
>> do something different, so any ebuild relying upon particular
>> behaviour is already broken.
> For an example of this, see http://bugs.gentoo.org/264308
I would say that is
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:33:48 +0200
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Why do you want to force -j1 here?
Because any package using an old automake has a non-parallel-safe
install.
> And i had this proposal some months ago, which noone argued against
> any more
It, along with the half dozen other variants f
Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> So far, we've got this, by agreement of the Council:
>
> * There will be a default src_install in EAPI 3
> * It will have a DOCS variable, or something along those lines.
>
> I'd like to suggest the following too:
>
> * If DOCS is explicitly specified, it is an error i
So far, we've got this, by agreement of the Council:
* There will be a default src_install in EAPI 3
* It will have a DOCS variable, or something along those lines.
I'd like to suggest the following too:
* If DOCS is explicitly specified, it is an error if anything in it
doesn't exist.
* If DO
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:40:14 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> No, an EAPI bump is necessary. Older (post-EAPI) Portage versions do
> something different, so any ebuild relying upon particular behaviour
> is already broken.
For an example of this, see http://bugs.gentoo.org/264308
Hi all,
This is just a quick announcement to let everyone know that Xorg 1.5.3
and pretty much all X libraries and apps which have been sitting in
~arch for months/years are finally going to go stable, replacing our
old, rusty and busted 1.3 X server.
Arch Teams have received the final packa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:32:12 +0200
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" wrote:
> On behalf of the Lisp project (which includes the Emacs subproject)
> I'd like to propose that preservation of mtimes be included as a
> requirement of EAPI3.
If you want mtime pre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
On behalf of the Lisp project (which includes the Emacs subproject) I'd like to
propose that preservation of mtimes be included as a requirement of EAPI3.
An EAPI bump may not be really necessary for this - after all we're just
specifying previou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The primary Bugzilla webserver is now back in operation.
>
> Additionally, for the moment, I've re-enabled the load-balancing, but
> note that it comes with a warning...
> Load balanced bugzilla webservers:
> http://bugs-web-
30 matches
Mail list logo
