Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:19:15 + "M. J. Everitt" wrote: > On 16/01/18 21:56, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:58:11 +0100 > > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > > >> On 01/16/2018 03:45 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > >>> Given the situation, we have a choice: Remove GnuCash

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 16/01/18 21:56, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:58:11 +0100 > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > >> On 01/16/2018 03:45 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: >>> Given the situation, we have a choice: Remove GnuCash altogether, or >>> press ahead with recommending a version upstream consider

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:58:11 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 01/16/2018 03:45 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > > Given the situation, we have a choice: Remove GnuCash altogether, or > > press ahead with recommending a version upstream considers > > unstable. > > Or 3, discuss with upstrea

[gentoo-dev] Re: News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

Kristian Fiskerstrand posted on Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:58:11 +0100 as excerpted: > On 01/16/2018 03:45 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: >> Given the situation, we have a choice: Remove GnuCash altogether, or >> press ahead with recommending a version upstream considers unstable. > > Or 3, discuss with up

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] linux-mod.eclass: IUSE default support for MODULES_OPTIONAL_USE

Robin H. Johnson wrote: > That is counter-intuitive for somebody that puts > MODULES_OPTIONAL_USE_IUSE_DEFAULT=0 > Or tries to otherwise have it unset. What I usually do is: case ${MODULES_OPTIONAL_USE_IUSE_DEFAULT:-n} in [nNfF]*|[oO][fF]*|0|-) # false case ;; *) # true case esac This

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: vanilla-sources broken

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:38:42PM +0100, Holger Hoffstätte wrote: On 01/05/18 15:08, Nicolas Bock wrote: currently vanilla-sources are broken, but there is an upstream patch that fixes it (appended at the end). I know that vanilla-sources are supposed to be vanilla, but it would help if we adde

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 01/16/2018 03:45 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > Given the situation, we have a choice: Remove GnuCash altogether, or > press ahead with recommending a version upstream considers unstable. Or 3, discuss with upstream to see if they can release an updated version as stable branch. -- Kristian Fi

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 2018-01-16 15:07, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:46:04 +0200 > Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > 2.6 is insecure by 400+ ancient webkit-gtk security vulnerabilities, > > we can't responsibly wait anymore. 2.7.3 was tested by Aaron (who > > uses it daily) to work quite nicely. > > I wan

[gentoo-dev] Re: vanilla-sources broken

On 01/05/18 15:08, Nicolas Bock wrote: > currently vanilla-sources are broken, but there is an upstream patch > that fixes it (appended at the end). I know that vanilla-sources are > supposed to be vanilla, but it would help if we added this patch > until upstream backports it. Any thoughts? This

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 01/16/2018 03:07 PM, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: > I think generated reports are typical use of webkit in GnuCash. Are > attack vectors so severe also in this case? Yes, as it would hinder upgrade / keep the vulnerable libraries on the system that can possibly be used by other packages. That said

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 22:46:04 +0200 Mart Raudsepp wrote: > On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 22:38 +0300, Peter Volkov wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson > > > org> wrote: > > > Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change > > > > Aaron, but why do we need this news item? 2.7 version is a

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Bugzilla arch list reordering

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > I disagree. I think most of the developers are used to the lexical sort, > and it keeps the order predictable. While I suppose keeping amd64 > and x86 alongside for the sake of being commonly used would make sense, > I really have no clue ho

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ${PYTHON_COMPAT_ADD} in addition to ${PYTHON_COMPAT_OVERRIDE}

W dniu wto, 16.01.2018 o godzinie 14∶09 +0100, użytkownik Francesco Riosa napisał: > > On 16/01/2018 08:57, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu pon, 15.01.2018 o godzinie 16∶27 +0100, użytkownik Francesco > > Riosa napisał: > > > In late 2015 ${PYTHON_COMPAT_OVERRIDE} has been standardized and added >

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ${PYTHON_COMPAT_ADD} in addition to ${PYTHON_COMPAT_OVERRIDE}

On 16/01/2018 01:40, Alec Warner wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:05 PM, Francesco Riosa > wrote: > > > > On 15/01/2018 18:07, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 10:27 AM, Francesco Riosa > mailto:viv...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> In late

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ${PYTHON_COMPAT_ADD} in addition to ${PYTHON_COMPAT_OVERRIDE}

On 16/01/2018 08:57, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu pon, 15.01.2018 o godzinie 16∶27 +0100, użytkownik Francesco > Riosa napisał: >> In late 2015 ${PYTHON_COMPAT_OVERRIDE} has been standardized and added >> to all python eclasses, it's useful for developers that want test and >> mark the package fo

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Bugzilla arch list reordering

W dniu wto, 16.01.2018 o godzinie 10∶15 +0100, użytkownik Dirkjan Ochtman napisał: > On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Besides regrouping, I've also reordered the keywords to use the same > > sorting order as eshowkw (i.e. ppc before ppc64), moved 'BSD' into teams > > (

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Bugzilla arch list reordering

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Besides regrouping, I've also reordered the keywords to use the same > sorting order as eshowkw (i.e. ppc before ppc64), moved 'BSD' into teams (in contrast to 'AMD64 FBSD' and 'X86 FBSD'), and added 'Prefix' team. > I think these are all