On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 14:00:04 -0800 (PST)
Alex Alexander wrote:
> To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5
>
> Thanks!
Errant thought: It may be useful for the tool that you use to generate this
mail to
embed a list of bug summaries, in the hope it will generate more interest and
On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 16:05:50 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr." wrote:
> Putting increased requirements on the maintainers may be demotivating, and
> create other problems. New profile added they are not aware of. Now they have
> to go add IUSE defaults etc. There are a fair amount of profiles.
>
Our bug queue has 85 bugs!
If you have some spare time, please help assign/sort a few bugs.
To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5
Thanks!
On Sunday, February 5, 2017 7:14:45 AM EST Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 12:44:38 -0500
>
> "William L. Thomson Jr." wrote:
> > The question to ask is who do you want to create more work for?
> > People maintaining packages, or people maintaining profiles.
>
> I would probably say "y
On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 12:44:38 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr." wrote:
> The question to ask is who do you want to create more work for?
> People maintaining packages, or people maintaining profiles.
I would probably say "yes" to both of those, because the main objective here
is to create less work
Christopher Head wrote:
>
> Are you sure that said utility isn't simply chown --from=?
As usual, I just checked the POSIX standard and not the
GNU extensions before posting ;)
I did now a quick audit of the coreutils-8.25 source:
It seems to be safely implemented in the way I mentioned.
On Saturday, February 4, 2017 9:57:01 AM EST Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 02/03/2017 08:07 PM, Patrick McLean wrote:
> > I think the current policy of "maintainer's discretion" is probably the
> > only reasonable way to approach IUSE defaults...
> >
> > Leaving the IUSE defaults up to the maintain
Does anyone have existing collections of git hooks they use locally on portage
to prevent themselves making dumb mistakes?
For example, one I just discovered I made back in December was I accidentally
keyworded a package for arches I don't have while doing an edit, and I'd imagine
the cause was bl
I am not using it for ages, feel free to take it if you want, thanks!
I am not using it for ages.. feel free to take it if you want
I am not interested on then anymore... then, feel free to take them if you want
Thanks
On 02/04/2017 03:50 AM, Christopher Head wrote:
>>
>> Not a bad idea... we chould ship that safe-chown utility, and then
>> tell users how to use it to fix their UIDs. The draft that I wrote up
>> was for the "fixed UID with random fallback" model, but said utility
>> could still be useful for peop
On 02/03/2017 08:07 PM, Patrick McLean wrote:
>
> I think the current policy of "maintainer's discretion" is probably the
> only reasonable way to approach IUSE defaults...
>
> Leaving the IUSE defaults up to the maintainer allows said maintainer
> to select what they consider reasonable defaults
Introduce an eclass to support dependencies building against slotted
LLVM. It provides a function to find the newest installed LLVM version
that is not newer than the max supported slot, and a trivial pkg_setup()
implementation that adds executable directory of this install to PATH.
This ensures t
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Christopher Head wrote:
>
> Why? It’s just another dependency. Why does DEPEND="dev-libs/bar" work
> so beautifully but DEPEND="dev-libs/bar[baz]" work so horribly? If I
> haven’t explicitly said I want baz, and I haven’t explicitly said I
> *don’t* want baz, and en
I am not interested on this package anymore... then, feel free to take it
Thanks!
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:29:04 -0500
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > However, it is no rocket science to write a race-free chown command
> > in C: Just open the file and use stat() and fchown() to be sure to
> > change only files from the "correct" user.
> >
> > Since this works on the filehandle and n
17 matches
Mail list logo
