Re: [gentoo-dev] packages to grab

2016-01-10 Thread Julian Simioni
On 01/10, Jason Zaman wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 08:28:16AM +0100, Justin Lecher (jlec) wrote: > > On 09/01/16 22:07, Julian Simioni wrote: > > > I'd love to proxy-maintain app-admin/pwgegn: it's used by > > > app-admin/pass which I use quite a bit. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] packages to grab

2016-01-09 Thread Julian Simioni
avzM4DHMFXWZq > VhLI5EjYapq9eqe7rHpHzGj06vZA3YioqCXGcyiMHg78qd2WfaupEydVCyxP75v8 > +YQHpyojVcxkmdDEc7ZFSHPQ+ti+QwcWzr1UZ23YRnwsYKD/+Ip9dDq8BQlkTno+ > dH70jHG1G6E8SjZD8pg52EEKdoxlhS+XGsgiVSvTlnVcrfbSAwdh48kMI3iCLinB > nxlJKWBCBHEQPbXXP4WV > =dGQ9 > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > Hi, I'd love to proxy-maintain app-admin/pwgegn: it's used by app-admin/pass which I use quite a bit. Thanks, Julian signature.asc Description: Digital signature

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] metadata: add slots element

2015-10-12 Thread Julian Ospald
There seems to be some general confusion about specific package SLOTs and their meaning, since there can be several naming schemes applied and documentation is either non-existent or is inside the ebuild via comments. Because of that it should be part of metadata.xml. An example use case for media

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Allow SLOT documentation in metadata.xml

2015-10-12 Thread Julian Ospald
The following patch tries to address the lack of slot documentation, since getting the slots of a dependency right seems like a common problem. Things that I was particularly not sure about: the 'subslots' element. Having a sub-element for 'slot' seemed even more messy, so I tried to make this as

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] eutils.eclass: Allow to configure base patch location for epatch_user

2015-09-05 Thread Julian Ospald
This is particularly useful for people who run alternative package managers and want to control their configuration. Github-PR: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/69 --- eclass/eutils.eclass | 14 ++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/eclass/eutils.eclas

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Fix spelling

2015-02-25 Thread Julian Ospald
--- ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml b/ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml index 49ec23b..b54f559 100644 --- a/ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml +++ b/ebuild-writing/using-ecla

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] Document policy of not relying on implicit eclass inherits

2015-02-25 Thread Julian Ospald
--- ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml | 10 +- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml b/ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml index de9ec7f..49ec23b 100644 --- a/ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml +++ b/ebuild-writing/

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 0/2] devmanual patches

2015-02-25 Thread Julian Ospald
documented. Otherwise we should expect sane eclass dependencies from ebuilds without random assumptions. Julian Ospald (2): Document policy of not relying on implicit eclass inherits Fix spelling ebuild-writing/using-eclasses/text.xml | 10 +- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal of accepting arguments to `default` in src_install (and more?) phases in EAPI=5 (for the next council meeting?)

2012-05-12 Thread julian
On 05/12/2012 06:50 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > Example, > > - Package is using autotools. > - The default phase like below works for the package: > > src_install() { > emake DESTDIR="${D}" install > dodoc README > } > > So when writing a new ebuild you would only add: > > DOCS="README" > > A