Hi,
I'm not sure if it's a sane way to push make -j1 via
src_compile() {
cmake-multilib_src_compile -j1
}
but I detected a lack of functionality in the current
cmake-multilib.eclass. Both cmake-utils.eclass and multilib-build.eclass
have it, so it might be sound to continue with this behavio
Hello everyone
Attached you will find the various changes I plan to apply to
kernel-2.eclass after a week if there are no objections, feel free to
take a look at them. A summary of the changes:
- Added a warning after the variables that modifying other variables in
the eclass is not supported,
On Friday 12 April 2013 15:41:55 James Cloos wrote:
> > "MF" == Mike Frysinger writes:
> >> It will impact everyone who has /dev/pts in fstab(5).
>
> MF> don't do that.
>
> *I* didn't.
that you remember. i think it's more likely you copy & pasted some line a
long time ago than baselayout
What do people think of something like this? Obviously the equivalent
patch to prefix would need to include a test for
PREFIX_DISABLE_GEN_USR_LDSCRIPT:
Author: Gregory M. Turner
Date: Fri Apr 12 11:13:21 2013 -0700
eclass/toolchain-funcs: Add target-has-split-usr API
Move the plat
On Thursday 11 April 2013 22:19:40 Duncan wrote:
> Mike Frysinger posted on Thu, 11 Apr 2013 12:49:00 -0400 as excerpted:
> > On Thursday 11 April 2013 11:43:59 James Cloos wrote:
> >> > "MF" == Mike Frysinger writes:
> >> MF> this should impact very few (if any)
> >> MF> users, so i don't thi
On Friday 12 April 2013 13:20:11 Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i don't know what you mean. if the ebuild detects devpts being mounted
> > and the mount is incorrect, it will die. if you don't have devpts
> > mounted at all, then it assumes you
> "MF" == Mike Frysinger writes:
>> It will impact everyone who has /dev/pts in fstab(5).
MF> don't do that.
*I* didn't.
I don't know /what/ added it, but something did. With noauto, just like
the other reported case.
It shouldn't matter how rare it is though. A general announcement won
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> i don't know what you mean. if the ebuild detects devpts being mounted and
>> the mount is incorrect, it will die. if you don't have devpts mounted at
>> all,
>> then it assumes y
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:25 PM, W. Trevor King wrote:
> In other words, “Why force folks to do this if there is no benefit?”.
> This is understandable, but I think the broken binary packages [1] are
> enough of a visible benefit.
I certainly agree. As I bump my own packages I'll certainly be
l
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i don't know what you mean. if the ebuild detects devpts being mounted and
> the mount is incorrect, it will die. if you don't have devpts mounted at all,
> then it assumes you know what you're doing.
What I am saying is that you make no
Over on #gentoo-releng and in gentoo-catalyst@ we've been running into
binary package dependency problems [1]. Before EAPI-5 and sub-slots,
the version of dependency packages is not recorded in the binary
package metadata (the Packages file). For example, a binary package
for GCC built against mp
On Friday 12 April 2013 02:50:20 Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i plan on updating the latest glibc to add USE=suid. in pkg_preinst and
> > ROOT==/, the ebuild will read /proc/mounts for a devpts line with gid=5.
> > if it doesn't find one, i'l
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 12:30:08AM +1000, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 7/04/2013 16:53, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
> > On 06.04.2013 20:08, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> As far as I'm aware, we don't really have much of a patch maintenance
> >> policy in Gentoo. There a few loose rules like «don't put awfull
13 matches
Mail list logo
