# Michael Palimaka (01 Oct 2017)
# Fails to build (bug #622632). Requires dead and vulnerable qtwebkit4
# (bug #620710). Masked for removal in 30 days.
media-sound/lastfm-desktop
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 04:27:31PM -0500, Austin English wrote
>> While having the pleasure of working with some proprietary software
>> recently, I was asked to run `service foo restart`, and was surprised to
>> see:
>> foobar ~ # service f
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Walter Dnes posted on Sat, 30 Sep 2017 00:20:31 -0400 as excerpted:
>
>> But, how do we reliably detect the currently running init system? Are
>> there running processes, or entries in /sys/ or /proc/ or /dev that are
>> uniqu
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 08:05:50PM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Samstag, 30. September 2017, 19:03:59 CEST schrieb Keri Harris:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is there a recommended method for testing if a package respects LDFLAGS?
> >
> > Arch testers are encouraged to add -Wl,--hash-style=gnu to LDFL
Walter Dnes posted on Sat, 30 Sep 2017 00:20:31 -0400 as excerpted:
> But, how do we reliably detect the currently running init system? Are
> there running processes, or entries in /sys/ or /proc/ or /dev that are
> unique to to each init system?
In theory at least, that's easy enough, just chec
Am Samstag, 30. September 2017, 19:03:59 CEST schrieb Keri Harris:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a recommended method for testing if a package respects LDFLAGS?
>
> Arch testers are encouraged to add -Wl,--hash-style=gnu to LDFLAGS
> [1],[2] and portage uses scanelf to check for .hash sections. However it
>
Hi,
Is there a recommended method for testing if a package respects LDFLAGS?
Arch testers are encouraged to add -Wl,--hash-style=gnu to LDFLAGS
[1],[2] and portage uses scanelf to check for .hash sections. However it
appears that ld defaults to using a .gnu.hash section:
$ touch test.c
$ gcc
Update DESCRIPTION while at there since DR17 is from the past.
---
eclass/enlightenment.eclass | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/enlightenment.eclass b/eclass/enlightenment.eclass
index c374af34cb1d..8e4cc5a7a241 100644
--- a/eclass/enlightenment.eclass
SVN for E is long gone.
---
eclass/enlightenment.eclass | 16 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/enlightenment.eclass b/eclass/enlightenment.eclass
index 23b6ffcc9f54..c374af34cb1d 100644
--- a/eclass/enlightenment.eclass
+++ b/eclass/enlightenme
git:// are now prohibited on git.enlightenment.org
---
eclass/enlightenment.eclass | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/eclass/enlightenment.eclass b/eclass/enlightenment.eclass
index ae7bb396590c..23b6ffcc9f54 100644
--- a/eclass/enlightenment.eclass
+++ b/eclass/en
it should be installed into /, not into ${ROOT}
---
eclass/vala.eclass | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/vala.eclass b/eclass/vala.eclass
index f8a45cdebed6..4227a64c394b 100644
--- a/eclass/vala.eclass
+++ b/eclass/vala.eclass
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ vala_b
Hi Chris
Sunday 03 Sep 2017 16:56:08, Chris Mayo wrote :
> ---
> Please consider this clarification of optfeature.
>
> Chris
>
> eclass/eutils.eclass | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/eclass/eutils.eclass b/eclass/eutils.eclass
> index fe4339f6b89..f3
On 30 September 2017 08:19:36 BST, "Michał Górny" wrote:
>W dniu sob, 30.09.2017 o godzinie 00∶20 -0400, użytkownik Walter Dnes
>napisał:
>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 04:27:31PM -0500, Austin English wrote
>> > (Note: serious discussion, please take systemd trolling elsewhere).
>> >
>> > While havi
W dniu sob, 30.09.2017 o godzinie 00∶20 -0400, użytkownik Walter Dnes
napisał:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 04:27:31PM -0500, Austin English wrote
> > (Note: serious discussion, please take systemd trolling elsewhere).
> >
> > While having the pleasure of working with some proprietary software
> > re
14 matches
Mail list logo
