23.09.2013 22:29, Markos Chandras пишет:
> On 09/23/2013 03:07 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>>
>> we have 'stable', 'dev' and 'exp'; the difference between 'dev' and
>> 'exp' is unclear to me. it could be changed so that broken deps in
>> 'dev' profiles are a repoman error (without -d) but without sta
On 09/23/2013 03:07 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
> we have 'stable', 'dev' and 'exp'; the difference between 'dev' and
> 'exp' is unclear to me. it could be changed so that broken deps in
> 'dev' profiles are a repoman error (without -d) but without stable
> keywords.
>
> Alexis.
>
I believe the
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 16:23:35 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
> >> The problem with that is that we don't track the keyword status of
> >> an arch anywhere in profiles, so tools like ekeyword or
> >> ebuild-mode in Emacs have no way of obtaining th
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> The problem with that is that we don't track the keyword status of an
>> arch anywhere in profiles, so tools like ekeyword or ebuild-mode in
>> Emacs have no way of obtaining that information (other than hardcoding
>> it).
> we do track it with
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 15:57:48 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> > if the entire tree is fine with some arch being at ~ and no
> > dependencies are broken, that could counted as 'stable' too.
> > then setting it from 'dev' to 'stable' will just mak
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> if the entire tree is fine with some arch being at ~ and no dependencies
> are broken, that could counted as 'stable' too.
> then setting it from 'dev' to 'stable' will just make sure nobody breaks
> the perfect record of no dependencies broken
On 23/09/13 16:08, Samuli Suominen wrote:
can't believe it was like that for amd64-fbsd and nobody noticed before,
fixed that.
scratch that too. left it at dev.
if the entire tree is fine with some arch being at ~ and no dependencies
are broken, that could counted as 'stable' too.
then setting
On 23/09/13 16:08, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 23/09/13 15:52, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Because I've seen some commits today for reverting the mentioned
KEYWORDS to ~arch in some ebuilds I'm not sure if everyone is aware that
the arch status is set using
On 23/09/13 15:52, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Because I've seen some commits today for reverting the mentioned
KEYWORDS to ~arch in some ebuilds I'm not sure if everyone is aware that
the arch status is set using profiles/profiles.desc and as I'm writing
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Because I've seen some commits today for reverting the mentioned
> KEYWORDS to ~arch in some ebuilds I'm not sure if everyone is aware that
> the arch status is set using profiles/profiles.desc and as I'm writing
> this, the mentioned arches a
[ ... ]
Stealing random mail from this thread.
Because I've seen some commits today for reverting the mentioned
KEYWORDS to ~arch in some ebuilds I'm not sure if everyone is aware that
the arch status is set using profiles/profiles.desc and as I'm writing
this, the mentioned arches are still
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:38:57AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> And committed.
>
> ---
>
> Title: m68k, s390, sh are dropping stable keywords
>
>
> Auth
And committed.
---
Title: m68k, s390, sh are dropping stable keywords
Author: Andreas K. Huettel
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2013-09-22
Revision: 1
News
On 2013-09-19 21:29, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> For general review and improvement, to be committed 2013-09-25...
> [The summary link [3] will work soon... :) ]
>
> ##
>
> Title: m68k, s390, and sh are dropping stable keywords
To stay within 42 characters, perhaps rewrite the ti
Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2013, 21:49:36 schrieb Pacho Ramos:
> What should we do with pending stabilization bugs having this arches
> CCed? unCC them?
Not sure... seems logical though...
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer (council, kde)
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
What should we do with pending stabilization bugs having this arches
CCed? unCC them?
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 21:29:35 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
> Title: m68k, s390, and sh are dropping stable keywords
Please note that this is longer than the GLEP 42 specification [1],
which mentions a short (maximum 44 characters) descriptive title.
"m68k, s390, and sh are dropping stable k
For general review and improvement, to be committed 2013-09-25...
[The summary link [3] will work soon... :) ]
##
Title: m68k, s390, and sh are dropping stable keywords
18 matches
Mail list logo
