Dnia 2015-06-12, o godz. 01:44:17
"Davide Pesavento (pesa)" napisał(a):
> pesa15/06/12 01:44:17
>
> Modified: ChangeLog qt4-build-multilib.eclass
> Log:
> Don't die when trying to rmdir non-existent directory (bug 551676).
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.1653
On 06/11/2015 11:43 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 08:58:37AM -0700, Andrew Udvare wrote:
>>
>>> On 2015-06-11, at 08:38, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>
>>> this eclass is meant to provide a common src_compile function for
>>> packages written in the Go programming language.
>>>
>>>
All,
I want to start a discussion here about the go ebuilds we have in the
tree that are installing *.a files to $GOROOT/pkg. From now on in this
message, when I say package, I mean a *.a file.
dev-lang/go must do this, because it includes the standard library.
However, I do not think third party
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 21:55:14 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> From previous ocaml stabilizations, I'd say that I'll have to use
> > --force for at least two months before it can be removed. I might
> > get bored and alias --force :)
>
> Unless the commit rate in dev-lang/ocaml (which was a total
Dnia 2015-06-11, o godz. 17:05:20
"Bernard Cafarelli (voyageur)" napisał(a):
> voyageur15/06/11 17:05:20
>
> Modified: ChangeLog llvm-.ebuild
> Log:
> Documentation build can be made optional again, add back pax markings
>
> (Portage version: 2.2.20/cvs/Linux x86_6
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 15:15:42 -0400
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>> In general I'd tend to agree, but we're talking about a very
>> limited pool of 70 packages,
49 packages with 58 ebuilds, to be precise.
>> whose maintainers should always be aware of
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 15:15:42 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Alexis Ballier
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:38:35 -0400
> > Rich Freeman wrote:
> >>
> >> These errors are not user-visible. I really don't have a problem
> >> with repoman errors for deprecated fea
Dnia 2015-06-11, o godz. 21:12:00
Alexis Ballier napisał(a):
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:38:35 -0400
> Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > These errors are not user-visible. I really don't have a problem with
> > repoman errors for deprecated features.
> >
>
> I don't have a problem with always using --
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:38:35 -0400
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> These errors are not user-visible. I really don't have a problem with
>> repoman errors for deprecated features.
>>
>
> I don't have a problem with always using --force either.
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:38:35 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> These errors are not user-visible. I really don't have a problem with
> repoman errors for deprecated features.
>
I don't have a problem with always using --force either. But then the
distinction between warnings and errors becomes much
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 08:58:37AM -0700, Andrew Udvare wrote:
>
> > On 2015-06-11, at 08:38, William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > this eclass is meant to provide a common src_compile function for
> > packages written in the Go programming language.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
>
> I am wo
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 18:33:36 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
>> >> Maintainers can still use --force if there is no other way.
>>
>> > i'm definitely not convinced it is good practice to encourage people
>> > to do that ;)
>>
>> People are
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 18:33:36 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> Maintainers can still use --force if there is no other way.
>
> > i'm definitely not convinced it is good practice to encourage people
> > to do that ;)
>
> People are strongly encouraged to update their ebuilds to a newer
> EAPI. ;)
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> dev-lang/ocaml-3.12.1 in slot
> in subslot not slot, but more importantly in stable
Right, there are newer ebuilds in slot 0 for dev-lang/ocaml. I've
double-checked the list now; for all other packages the "in slot" was
accura
> On 2015-06-11, at 08:38, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> this eclass is meant to provide a common src_compile function for
> packages written in the Go programming language.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
I am wondering about bug 503324 and the issue of needing to create a GOROOT
with everythi
All,
It turns out that we do need a second eclass for Go packages.
this eclass is meant to provide a common src_compile function for
packages written in the Go programming language.
Let me know what you think.
Thanks,
William
# Copyright 1999-2015 Gentoo Foundation
# Distributed under the ter
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:32:54PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:53:28AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 08 Jun 2015 14:38, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > # We depend on dev-vcs/git since it is the most used vcs for Go
> > > # packages. However we will not depend on all v
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 13:13:18 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Jason Zaman wrote:
> dev-lang/ocaml-3.12.1 in slot
in subslot not slot, but more importantly in stable
> > my bet would be that those 60 ebuilds are from packages barely
> > maintained,
10.06.2015 23:43, Ulrich Mueller пишет:
> 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
> h
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015, Jason Zaman wrote:
> This would be great! Do we have a list somewhere of ebuilds that are
> still EAPI1? and which of those have a newer version that is a
> higher EAPI for the same keywords? IE how many of the EAPI1 ebuilds
> cant just be dropped?
> On Thu, 11 Jun
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 11.06.2015 11:16, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> 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 discusse
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
Wednesday 10 Jun 2015 22:43:10, 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".
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 10:43:10PM +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-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 06/10/2015 01:43 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
25 matches
Mail list logo
