On 06/10/15 11:08, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:34:34PM -0400, Dean Stephens wrote:
>> On 06/08/15 15:38, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> here is the latest version of this eclass, which I will commit
>>> an hour from now if no one has any objections.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Am Mittwoch, 10. Juni 2015, 22:43:10 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
>
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-banned". This would
> have the consequence that repoman would refuse t
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:43:10 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-banned". This would
> have the consequence that repoman would refuse to commit packages
> containing such ebuilds. AFAICS th
Dnia 2015-06-10, o godz. 22:43:10
Ulrich Mueller napisał(a):
> Hi,
> The number of EAPI 1 ebuilds in the Portage tree has decreased to
> a total of 60, corresponding to 0.16 %.
>
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-b
On 6/10/2015 4:43 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
> The number of EAPI 1 ebuilds in the Portage tree has decreased to
> a total of 60, corresponding to 0.16 %.
>
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-banned". This would
On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 22:43:10 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
> The number of EAPI 1 ebuilds in the Portage tree has decreased to
> a total of 60, corresponding to 0.16 %.
>
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-banne
On 2015-06-10 22:43, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
> The number of EAPI 1 ebuilds in the Portage tree has decreased to
> a total of 60, corresponding to 0.16 %.
>
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-banned". This would
>
El mié, 10-06-2015 a las 22:43 +0200, Ulrich Mueller escribió:
> Hi,
> The number of EAPI 1 ebuilds in the Portage tree has decreased to
> a total of 60, corresponding to 0.16 %.
>
> We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
> layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-b
Hi,
The number of EAPI 1 ebuilds in the Portage tree has decreased to
a total of 60, corresponding to 0.16 %.
We briefly discussed in the QA team if we should demote EAPI 1 in
layout.conf from "eapis-deprecated" to "eapis-banned". This would
have the consequence that repoman would refuse to commit
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Joakim Tjernlund <
joakim.tjernl...@transmode.se> wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 18:48 +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 04:44:17PM +, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
> sys-apps/get
On 6/10/15 2:49 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 14:06 -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 6/10/15 1:52 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
sys-apps/getent(included below)
to
On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 18:48 +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 04:44:17PM +, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
> > sys-apps/getent(included below)
> > to impl. getent in user.eclass instead of using glibc's getent? I
> > c
On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 14:06 -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 6/10/15 1:52 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
> > wrote:
> > > I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
> > > sys-apps/getent(included below)
> > > to impl. getent in user
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 04:44:17PM +, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
> sys-apps/getent(included below)
> to impl. getent in user.eclass instead of using glibc's getent? I
> cannot see any downside, is there one?
>
> This would help a lot(just
On 6/10/15 1:52 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
sys-apps/getent(included below)
to impl. getent in user.eclass instead of using glibc's getent? I cannot see
any downside, is there one?
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
> I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
> sys-apps/getent(included below)
> to impl. getent in user.eclass instead of using glibc's getent? I cannot see
> any downside, is there one?
>
glibc's getent can get data from a
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:53:28AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 08 Jun 2015 14:38, William Hubbs wrote:
> > # Copyright 2015 Gentoo Foundation
>
> normally we use the header from skel.ebuild everywhere
Ok, I can fix that.
>
> > # We depend on dev-vcs/git since it is the most used vcs for G
I wonder if it would be possible to use the script from
sys-apps/getent(included below)
to impl. getent in user.eclass instead of using glibc's getent? I cannot see
any downside, is there one?
This would help a lot(just seed your groups/users is in ROOT/etc/{passwd,group
...} first)
when cross
On 08 Jun 2015 14:38, William Hubbs wrote:
> # Copyright 2015 Gentoo Foundation
normally we use the header from skel.ebuild everywhere
> # We depend on dev-vcs/git since it is the most used vcs for Go
> # packages. However we will not depend on all vcs's Go supports at the
> # eclass level. If yo
Le mercredi 10 juin 2015 à 11:04 -0400, Mike Gilbert a écrit :
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue <
> e...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > This is an attempt to fix bug #208047 [1] and bug #444568 [2]
> >
> > Current fdo-mime eclass is often not used when it should be. I
> > suppose
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:34:34PM -0400, Dean Stephens wrote:
> On 06/08/15 15:38, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > here is the latest version of this eclass, which I will commit an
> > hour from now if no one has any objections.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > William
> >
> Not an objection to t
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> This is an attempt to fix bug #208047 [1] and bug #444568 [2]
>
> Current fdo-mime eclass is often not used when it should be. I suppose
> this is partly because one has to think too much about whether it is
> needed or not and what
This is an attempt to fix bug #208047 [1] and bug #444568 [2]
Current fdo-mime eclass is often not used when it should be. I suppose
this is partly because one has to think too much about whether it is
needed or not and what to do with the functions.
The proposed solution is to not have to worry
23 matches
Mail list logo
