On 14/7/2005 7:24:03, Craig Lawson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> [...] To be more concrete, I'm thinking of something like a database [...]
I don't think a separate database is a good idea; too many sources for
information.
> [...] For example [...]
> current: any
> target: =gnome-base/gno
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 09:17:38AM +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> On 14/7/2005 7:24:03, Craig Lawson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > [...] To be more concrete, I'm thinking of something like a database [...]
> I don't think a separate database is a good idea; too many sources for
> information.
How
maillog: 14/07/2005-00:36:15(-0700): Robin H. Johnson types
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 09:17:38AM +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > On 14/7/2005 7:24:03, Craig Lawson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > [...] To be more concrete, I'm thinking of something like a database [...]
> > I don't think a separa
Chris White wrote:
>>never reassign a bug
>
>
> Ok, I have a section on how to re-assign the bug to the maintainer if you're
> the reporter, so you don't want that at all is what you're saying? Just let
> bug-wranglers handle it?
Yes, I'm pretty much saying that. Thinking back to the situatio
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am I the only one receiving this message? I have received another one
last days. If so, there is someone infected that is subscribed to this
list. Could be smithj himself, but usually the sender is forged. The two
emails come from: [194.225.228.20] (he
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 20:02 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:44 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > > I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for packages like
> But anyway, the question is not whether the
On Thursday 14 July 2005 20:58, Ned Ludd wrote:
> echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would ever"
> echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"
Actually, I promote interactive code in pkg_config(). There's no standard as
to what it will do, so the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Alin Dobre wrote:
> Am I the only one receiving this message? I have received another one
> last days. If so, there is someone infected that is subscribed to this
> list. Could be smithj himself, but usually the sender is forged. The two
> emails come
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan Smith wrote:
> i also got that, much to my surprise. i send all email through toucan
> and my ip is 166.82.xxx.xxx, so it can't be me. i run only gentoo and
> mozilla tb, none of which are prone to worms of this kind. i have no
> idea why th
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 14:18 +0300, Alin Dobre wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am I the only one receiving this message? I have received another one
> last days. If so, there is someone infected that is subscribed to this
> list. Could be smithj himself, but usually the
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 07:58 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 20:02 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 18:44 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to add a new command to ebuild (preconfig) for pac
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 08:43 +0200, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 01:13 -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote:
> > What I want is "emerge busybox uclibc vanilla-sources nano". Should
> > unpack only the 3 first packages, show me busybox menuconfig, uclibc
> > menuconfig and vanilla-sources men
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Filtering the lists leads to a slippery slope. What happens when you
> start getting false positives?
True, but why not filtering binary attachments? *If* you have to send an
attachment to these lists, it should either be plain text or your
gpg-signature.
Regards,
--
On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 16:49 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> BTW, it's not in good form to post to multiple lists where only
> subscribers can respond.
I appologise.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 21:37 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> On Thursday 14 July 2005 20:58, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > echo "being that no portage dev in his/her right mind would ever"
> > echo "allow interactive code in an ebuild we use bashrc tricks"
>
> Actually, I promote interactive code in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kristian Benoit wrote:
> # ebuild path/to/ebuild config"
>
> I'm trying to do the same as config does, but in as a preconfig that
> would only be also called on user request.
>
I'm just idly thinking here, and I'm sorry if this has already been said
Daniel Drake posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on
Thu, 14 Jul 2005 12:17:34 +0100:
> Chris White wrote:
>>>never reassign a bug
>>
>>
>> Ok, I have a section on how to re-assign the bug to the maintainer if
>> you're the reporter, so you don't want that at all is what you're
>> sayin
On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 12:01 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
> Not sure of the mechanics on how
> this is done for the portage emerge process, but even stopping the
> emerge process for those packages that *must* have a preconfig done
> would help (are there any though? I can think of one maybe, but
On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 04:37:42PM +, Elfyn McBratney wrote:
> As some of you may have noticed, I did a bit of a disappearing act early last
> month due to many many changes in my personal life. I am sorry that this
> happened, and apologies to everyone I seemingly ignored. :/
I'd like to ta
Actually, when executing pkg_config with "ebuild some/ebuild.ebuild
config", the stdin/stdout are broken cause we are not writing to a
terminal.
I fixed it with this patch:
diff -uNpr portage-2.0.51.19/pym/portage.py
portage-2.0.51.19-config/pym/portage.py
--- portage-2.0.51.19/pym/portage.py
20 matches
Mail list logo
