Mateusz Mierzwinski (me.matheos.org) wrote:
> Received: by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix)
> id ABDDD64A4E; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 22:36:12 + (UTC)
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:28:40 +0100
You might want to run `ntpdate pool.ntp.org`...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robin H. Johnson schrieb:
> I'm raising this as an extension of bug 253076, but also because I see
> the potential for danger.
>
> To date, for an init script that has baselayout2-specific behavior, we
> have had some variant of [ -e /lib/librc.so ] i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Benedikt Boehm (hollow) schrieb:
> hollow 09/01/10 21:41:41
>
> Modified: package.mask
> Log:
> mask sys-apps/baselayout-vserver for removal
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.9378 profiles/package.mask
>
> file :
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Petteri Räty schrieb:
> s/mutlilib/multilib/
Thanks, fixed.
> I also don't understand why this news item needed to wait for a Portage
> to go stable.
It didn't need to wait for portage but portage just happened to go
stable about the same time the p
CAAYFAklbkUYACgkQknxn9PmJ76X6UgCeNDiKufUBOJ+L7sQPv4nvBBGM
vIwAnRTVmxQOutloBVG7XIf/FJo5aG+E
=qYuu
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Title: Migrating to the new sparc mutlilib profile
Author: Friedrich Oslage
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2008-12-30
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Profile: default/linux/spar
ttp://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAklaKmMACgkQknxn9PmJ76Uk/QCfUrvvCaWo+qAXHXBA+DqxrkrB
04wAoJlOYZ5+K5xS+JjbALkcDYP93Ve3
=+aPC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Title: Migrating to the new sparc mutlilib profile
Author: Friedrich Oslage
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2008-12-30
Revision: 1
News-Item-Forma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tobias Klausmann schrieb:
> All .28 series kernels (all rc kernels and the final one, too) do
> not compile on Alpha at all. We reported this when rc1 came out
> and the culprit and a possible solution were discussed[0], but
> nothing materialized. I r
Am Sonntag, den 05.10.2008, 16:26 -0500 schrieb Steev Klimaszewski:
>
> Thoughts? Helps?
>
Afaik we have 3 types of arches:
- experimental
They are not CCed on stablization bugs and don't do stablizations at
all.
~mips, ~sparc-fbsd and ~x86-fbsd
- unsupported
They are CCed on stablizations bug
Maybe we should ask Recruiters what most people answered to that
eom-quiz question :)
I personally think no, individual ebuild devs shouldn't touch
arch-profiles. They should simply drop the (broken) keywords and file a
keywordreq bug for those arches. Then the arch-teams can test and
eventually d
