On 6/12/13 11:51 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> Still seems like working in gentoo-x86 without doing stabilization
> would cover most of those bases. Working in the unstable main tree is
> still a lot better than keeping stuff out there in an overlay, IMO.
+1
This works really well for the Gentoo C
On 6/9/13 7:22 AM, Alex Legler wrote:
> I'd appreciate some input on below plan to move project pages to the Wiki:
Alex, thanks for working on this! Some feedback:
1. How will the project pages be protected against "unwanted" edits? I
think it's valuable to have some official pages where you know
On 06/16/2013 04:37 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> # Pacho Ramos (15 Jun 2013)
> # Upstream dead for ages, nothing requires it, wrongly
> # generated .la files (#201440). Removal in a month.
> rox-base/rox-clib
>
No :)
I've commented out that mask in package.mask because:
dependency.bad
> Special pages and contents
> --
> herds.xml, repositories.xml, etc.:
> As these are intended for other applications to use, these should go to
> a new site, possibly api.gentoo.org, initially fed from a git repository.
> This site should get backed by SSL.
Here's a partial
>From the infra perspective, I would like to add that I support this
move, I just have a few concerns on the conversion, one of which is
dealt with here.
> I've committed my draft XSL to the gentoo/xml/htdocs/xsl location, named
> guidexml2wiki.xsl. It still requires some updates that I'll work on
On 06/15/2013 06:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53
"Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" napisał(a):
And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
SRC_URI="
git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo
svn+ssh://assembla.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/15/2013 05:15 PM, Michael Weber wrote:
> On 06/15/2013 02:14 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's
>> not a?T threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic
>> statement.
> Step a
On 06/15/2013 11:24 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> Please both of you. Stop it now and take it elsewhere. Consider this a
> friendly warning.
Agreed. Sorry for my impulsive response.
I don't say thanks for the warning, but for your counseling of the
mailing list.
I'm on a borderline between advocati
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 06/15/2013 05:12 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> There is currently no need for improvement in my eyes, and I'm not
> sure this could be considered improvement anyway.
i.e. git-2.eclass provides support for environment override (and
variable
On 15/06/2013 22:21, Michael Weber wrote:
> Fine, we would all benefit from a environment without your snappy
> comments and cryptic responses. Seriously, learn some social skill in
> your free time.
See, I cannot exactly voice what my opinion of you is on a public forum,
or I would have done so.
On 15 June 2013 22:21, Michael Weber wrote:
> On 06/15/2013 11:17 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> On 15/06/2013 22:15, Michael Weber wrote:
> It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T
> threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.
>>> Ste
On 06/15/2013 11:17 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 15/06/2013 22:15, Michael Weber wrote:
It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T
threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.
>> Step away then.
>
> You know what? I really should ju
On 15/06/2013 22:17, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> You know what? I really should just leave and see how people who think
> that a live ebild is a nice idea will ruin it. It's not like I depend on
> Gentoo for my work anymore.
Oh wait, I already know how that's going to happen.. bug #443448 is a
nic
On 15/06/2013 22:15, Michael Weber wrote:
>> > It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T
>> > threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.
> Step away then.
You know what? I really should just leave and see how people who think
that a live ebild i
On 06/15/2013 02:14 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a?T
> threat or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.
Step away then.
--
Michael Weber
Gentoo Developer
web: https://xmw.de/
mailto: Michael Weber
# Pacho Ramos (15 Jun 2013)
# Upstream dead for ages, nothing requires it, wrongly
# generated .la files (#201440). Removal in a month.
rox-base/rox-clib
# Pacho Ramos (15 Jun 2013)
# No downstream maintainer for a long time, please move
# to sys-kernel/linux-firmware that is actively maintained
On 06/15/2013 11:43 AM, Luca Barbato wrote:
On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on
layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is an open
bug calling
Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 18:25:15
Ulrich Mueller napisał(a):
> > On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, hasufell wrote:
>
> >> PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell:
> >> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3
> >>
> >> So the devmanual agrees with the spec, and the
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:56:00 -0400
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> If we find that all known implementations of PMS/EAPI 4 have
>> implemented a certain behavior, making a change to that version of PMS
>> to properly document the behavior seems r
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:56:00 -0400
Mike Gilbert wrote:
> If we find that all known implementations of PMS/EAPI 4 have
> implemented a certain behavior, making a change to that version of PMS
> to properly document the behavior seems reasonable.
Part of the point of EAPI stability is that it doesn
On 06/15/2013 06:56 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> If we find that all known implementations of PMS/EAPI 4 have
> implemented a certain behavior, making a change to that version of PMS
> to properly document the behavior seems reasonable.
>
Right, that's why my quote from the council log does not m
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:24:13 +0200
> Tom Wijsman wrote:
>> What does it take to change future specifications to guarantee this?
>
> You can have it from EAPI 6 onwards.
>
>> What's holding this from becoming guaranteed? Why not fix the sp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:45:05 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> On 06/15/2013 06:43 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:41:18 +0200 hasufell
> > wrote:
> >> On 06/15/2013 06:24 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> >>> Why not fix the specs?
> >
> >> from
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/15/2013 06:43 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:41:18 +0200 hasufell
> wrote:
>> On 06/15/2013 06:24 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>>> Why not fix the specs?
>
>> from council log
>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-log
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:41:18 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> On 06/15/2013 06:24 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > Why not fix the specs?
>
> from council log
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20120911.txt
>
> Okay for EAPI 5. *Nothing* gets ap
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:24:13 +0200
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> What does it take to change future specifications to guarantee this?
You can have it from EAPI 6 onwards.
> What's holding this from becoming guaranteed? Why not fix the specs?
The specs accurately reflect Portage behaviour at the time the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/15/2013 06:24 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>
> Why not fix the specs?
>
from council log
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20120911.txt
Okay for EAPI 5. *Nothing* gets applied retroactively. *EVER*
So that means some people thi
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:51:03 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> The approach paludis uses just seems simpler all-around, minus the
> fact that it doesn't provide defaults for internals that need not be
> exposed (vdb and such - which admittedly aren't needed by exherbo).
I've not heard people ask for de
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:56:53 +0700
"Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" wrote:
> Sometimes I find myself in a situation, when I need to use both
> RESTRICT=fetch for the main distfile and allow fetch for additional
> ones (langpacks, extensions and so on).
> Sometimes it is even impossible to split that ad
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:16:32 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> > The devmanual warns that calling die in a subshell does not work.
>
> > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/error-handling/index.html
>
> > This warning has been obsolete for
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, hasufell wrote:
>> PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell:
>> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3
>>
>> So the devmanual agrees with the spec, and the eclasses need to be
>> fixed.
> How does that make any sense?
It makes p
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Are there any objections to removing this warning from the
>> devmanual?
>
> PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3
>
> So the devmanual agrees with the spe
On 15/06/2013 17:19, hasufell wrote:
> How does that make any sense?
>
It does not, but I don't remember anybody trying to assert that PMS
makes sense in quite a long time.
(Yes I still think that the PMS is 90% a waste of time)
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http:/
On 06/15/2013 06:16 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
> PMS doesn't guarantee that die works correctly in a subshell:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/5/pms.html#x1-12800011.3.3
>
> So the devmanual agrees with the spec, and the eclasses need to be
> fixed.
>
How does that make any sense?
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> The devmanual warns that calling die in a subshell does not work.
> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/error-handling/index.html
> This warning has been obsolete for some time; modern versions of
> Portage handle die in a subshell just fin
On 15/06/2013 17:06, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> Are there any objections to removing this warning from the devmanual?
Please, go for it.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
The devmanual warns that calling die in a subshell does not work.
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/error-handling/index.html
This warning has been obsolete for some time; modern versions of
Portage handle die in a subshell just fine.
In
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>>> The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on
>>> layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is
On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>> The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on
>> layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is an open
>> bug calling for it to be merged with portage...
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on
> layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is an open
> bug calling for it to be merged with portage...
Honestly, native support for overlays is somethi
On Sat, 2013-06-15 at 15:05 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53
> "Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" napisał(a):
>
> > And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
> >
> > SRC_URI="
> > git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
> > hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/15/2013 04:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> Sometimes I find myself in a situation, when I need to use both
> RESTRICT=fetch for the main distfile and allow fetch for additional ones
> (langpacks, extensions and so on).
> Sometimes it is
On 15 June 2013 15:33, Markos Chandras wrote:
>Also || die does not work in subshells.
>
> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/error-handling/index.html
>
Sorry scratch that. I just realized || die is not inside the subshell
--
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.
Hi Vadim,
On 15 June 2013 09:39, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> # Make sure that file exists
> [[ -f "./$i" ]] && (
> local type=$(file -b ${i})
> case ${type} in
> data)
>
El sáb, 15-06-2013 a las 12:50 +0100, Diego Elio Pettenò escribió:
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
> wrote:
>
> And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
>
> SRC_URI="
> git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.g
On 15/06/2013 14:47, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Or the other way around: {fetch,mirror}+http. I'd rather have RESTRICT
> apply to all of SRC_URI (as it is now) and use the new syntax to
> specify any exceptions from the restriction.
WFM
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http
On 15/06/2013 23:47, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
"restrict+http:" (as suggested by the OP) is probably not enough
because it doesn't distinguish between fetch and mirror
restriction.
nofetch+http and nomirror+http ?
Or the other way around: {fetch,
On 06/15/2013 02:34 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> 15.06.2013 18:50, Diego Elio Pettenò пишет:
>> Over my dead CVS access.
> Any reasonable/argumented objection?
to put in different words:
We do not want to use untraceable/transient/ephemeral sources for main
ebuilds, live ebuilds are cor
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> "restrict+http:" (as suggested by the OP) is probably not enough
>> because it doesn't distinguish between fetch and mirror
>> restriction.
> nofetch+http and nomirror+http ?
Or the other way around: {fetch,mirror}+http. I'd rather have RES
On 15/06/2013 14:34, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> "restrict+http:" (as suggested by the OP) is probably not enough
> because it doesn't distinguish between fetch and mirror restriction.
nofetch+http and nomirror+http ?
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.e
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> Over my dead CVS access.
> Grandstanding aside, it is probably best to take this in chunks.
> The all-or-nothing fetch restriction control does seem like a good
> place to start improving. I could certainly see where that could
> create needless
Am Samstag, 15. Juni 2013, 15:15:57 schrieb Diego Elio Pettenò:
> On 15/06/2013 14:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > At work just about every boss I have had any respect for would have
> > fired me on the spot for making such a statement and not retracting it
>
> At work you're also paid to for the time
On 15/06/2013 14:11, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> And I suggest you all (including Diego) to discuss about that, instead
> of oppositing vcs-related SRC_URI ;)
Then next time don't collapse two widely different proposals, especially
considering that one of the two has been already discussed
On 15/06/2013 14:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
> At work just about every boss I have had any respect for would have
> fired me on the spot for making such a statement and not retracting it
At work you're also paid to for the time you spend justifying for the
Nth time why a proposal is completely crazy
15.06.2013 20:05, Michał Górny пишет:
> It simply can't work. Don't even try to implement, it's waste of time.
As I already metioned to Diego — VCS part is just optional example of
that things, that can be useful.
Mainly idea in partial restricting.
And I suggest you all (including Diego) to discu
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
> It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a threat
> or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.
That IS grandstanding. I'm not saying I disagree with the position
you advocate, but saying "do i
Dnia 2013-06-15, o godz. 15:56:53
"Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" napisał(a):
> And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
>
> SRC_URI="
> git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
> hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo
> svn+ssh://assembla.com/lol/moo
> "
It simply can't work. Do
On 15/06/2013 13:48, Alexander V Vershilov wrote:
> Can you elaborate:
> do you object both proposals (about partial restrict and VCS-support)
> or only second
> one (VCS-support)?
As I already said in my answer to Rich, the VCS support is XOR'd with my
CVS access.
And I've already spent too muc
On 15 June 2013 15:50, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
>>
>> SRC_URI="
>> git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
>> hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo
>>
15.06.2013 18:50, Diego Elio Pettenò пишет:
> Over my dead CVS access.
Any reasonable/argumented objection?
And, anyway, quoted part is optional behaviour that should just make
ebuild-writing easy.
Mandatory part is to be able to have restrict://foo.bar and downloadable
things at the same time.
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> Grandstanding aside, it is probably best to take this in chunks.
I just don't care to repeat for the Nth time the same reasoning for which I
don't want to mainstream VCS fetching.
It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
>>
>> SRC_URI="
>> git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
>> hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/m
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>
> And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
>
> SRC_URI="
> git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
> hg+ssh://bitbucket.org/lol/moo
> svn+ssh://assembla.com/lol/moo
> "
>
Over my dead CVS access.
Sometimes I find myself in a situation, when I need to use both
RESTRICT=fetch for the main distfile and allow fetch for additional ones
(langpacks, extensions and so on).
Sometimes it is even impossible to split that additions into separate
package, since they might want to replace some file (for
As gamerlay maintainer, I'd be glad to introduce some changes to
unpacker.eclass:
1) merging unpacker-nixstaller (Makeself subspecies) from gamerlay:
# @FUNCTION: unpack_nixstaller
# @USAGE:
# @DESCRIPTION:
# Unpack nixstaller generated files
# They're shell scripts with the blob package tagged
65 matches
Mail list logo
