On 17-08-04 17:17:05, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On K, 2017-07-26 at 11:56 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > sys-boot/plymouth is orphan for a long time. Its old 0.8.x versions
> > where having
> > important bugs that were fixed in 0.9.x, but 0.9 is also plenty of
> > issues. Then,
> > either this is adopt
On 09/08/17 10:43, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:29:40 +1000
> "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
>
>> On 09/08/17 04:20, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200
>>> Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
- You might be applying local patches through /e
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:29:40 +1000
"Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
> On 09/08/17 04:20, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200
> > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> >> - You might be applying local patches through /etc/portage/patches
> >> that are distributed to all clie
On 09/08/17 04:20, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200
> Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>> - You might be applying local patches through /etc/portage/patches
>> that are distributed to all clients
>
> This might be the strongest reason. Though would only apply to stuf
Am Dienstag, 8. August 2017, 20:55:41 CEST schrieb Andrew Savchenko:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 04:20:18 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote:
> > We're finally at a point where we're nearing the unmasking[1] of Perl
> > 5.26 and making it visible to ~arch users, and a "news item" on this
> > matter will appear shor
On sob, 2017-07-01 at 18:22 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Include LDFLAGS in the variables stripped by strip-unsupported-flags.
> The code reuses the current functions for testing CC, and so only remove
> LDFLAGS that are rejected by the C compiler and not the linker. This
> solves the case of bug #
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 04:20:18 +1200 Kent Fredric wrote:
> We're finally at a point where we're nearing the unmasking[1] of Perl
> 5.26 and making it visible to ~arch users, and a "news item" on this
> matter will appear shortly.
>
> Due to a collection of various problems faced in this version,
> ex
> > On 08/08/2017 07:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > >> it can already be controlled through env files.
> > > I was thinking it might, but having used them to skip other
> > > hooks. I was thinking they could not be used as such for binary
> > > packages. Have you confirmed such is p
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 20:15:07 +0200
Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 08/08/2017 08:10 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> >> I'm not sure explicitly about environment files, but it's an
> >> option to emerge. For instance, I've added this to my
> >> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to ensure none of the follo
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:32:48 +0200
Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 08/08/2017 07:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > Can you think of any? I cannot see any operator wanting a binary of
> > a binary, or a package of sources. When they already have a
> > sources
>
> - The machine you're i
On 08/08/2017 08:10 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>> I'm not sure explicitly about environment files, but it's an option to
>> emerge. For instance, I've added this to my EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to
>> ensure none of the following are built:
>>
>> --buildpkg-exclude "virtual/* sys-kernel/*-sources
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 13:34:00 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> I'm not sure explicitly about environment files, but it's an option to
> emerge. For instance, I've added this to my EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS to
> ensure none of the following are built:
>
> --buildpkg-exclude "virtual/* sys-kernel/*-source
On 08/08/17 01:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:11:18 +0200
> Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>
>> it can already be controlled through env files.
>
> I was thinking it might, but having used them to skip other hooks. I
> was thinking they could not be used as such for b
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:18:36 -0700
Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> Whether it belongs in the ebuild, or in metadata, is another matter.
The how, implementation, etc is not as important to me. I just think
there should be some means to prevent such. If there is not currently.
As mentioned there could be o
On 08/08/2017 07:23 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> Can you think of any? I cannot see any operator wanting a binary of a
> binary, or a package of sources. When they already have a sources
- The machine you're installing it on might not have internet access so
you want to have the files stor
On wto, 2017-08-08 at 10:18 -0700, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
> wrote:
> > On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > > I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates.
> > > It does not make sense for some pa
On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:11:18 +0200
Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite
> > updates. It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a
> > binary package.
>
> Any particular re
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>> I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates.
>> It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a binary package.
>
> Any particular reason this d
On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates.
> It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a binary package.
Any particular reason this decision shouldn't be left to the operator of
the binhost rather than t
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
wrote:
>
> As most things I think this would require support in PMS, or next EAPI
> at minimum. But I think the EAPI comes from PMS, so they are related.
>
Actually, I'm not sure about this since it doesn't really affect what
is actually bui
I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite updates.
It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a binary package.
Packages like -bin packages or gentoo-sources, which are just sources.
Having binary ebuilds of those is of no benefit. I can be the opposite
causing things
We're finally at a point where we're nearing the unmasking[1] of Perl
5.26 and making it visible to ~arch users, and a "news item" on this
matter will appear shortly.
Due to a collection of various problems faced in this version,
extensive amounts of work has been needed to simply deliver an ~arch
The failure happens when live glibc- ebuild is installed:
* QA Notice: Missing gen_usr_ldscript for libm-2.26.90.so
* ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-::gentoo failed:
* add those ldscripts
The problem here is how upstream glibc version is detected:
dosym ../../$(get_libdir)/libm-${PV}.so $(
# Brian Evans
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Hello,
The following packages are up for grabs:
x11-wm/afterstep
mail-client/nmh
dev-util/wsta
dev-util/bats
app-admin/yadm
Best regards,
Amy Liffey
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Quoting Daniel Campbell (2017-08-07 22:38:53)
> On 08/06/2017 02:27 AM, tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
> > Quoting Daniel Campbell (2017-07-31 04:16:30)
> >> On 07/19/2017 02:33 AM, Amy Liffey wrote:
...
> >>
> > Ok, as I have done some quite Forth programming in the past, let me step in.
> >
> > Thomas
26 matches
Mail list logo
