Re: [gentoo-dev] grub reiser4

2005-10-05 Thread Roy Marples
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 09:17 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 10:10 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: > > On 03/10/05, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'd prefer if the patch was left out for amd64 users, or included via a > > > use flag. reiser4 isn't yet stable or pr

Re: [gentoo-dev] xfce eclass testing/suggestions

2005-10-05 Thread Daniel Ostrow
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 02:38 -0400, Brad Cowan wrote: > Hi, > > I just spent this evening working on rewriting a really poor eclass > that I wrote a year or more ago. I would like some people to test and > please offer any suggestions for improvement to this so hopefully it can > get into portag

Re: [gentoo-dev] xfce eclass testing/suggestions

2005-10-05 Thread Brad Cowan
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 10:21 -0400, Daniel Ostrow wrote: > > > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~bcowan/portage.xfce4/ > > > > Looks good to me... > > Also I have all of the modular X deps for XFCE4 enumerated locally in an > overlay on my machine...which changes the deps in the eclass a tad...we > shou

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improved ebuild information

2005-10-05 Thread Martin Schlemmer
On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 21:22 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 22:19:39 +0200 Daniel Stiefelmaier > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | I'd like to have a functionality that prints out what the useflags of > | a ebuild are good for. Some are obvious, others are not. Example: > | The use

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improved ebuild information

2005-10-05 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Wed, 05 Oct 2005 20:03:54 +0200 Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | I guess I am one of this 'minority'. The question I just want to have | answered, is how the hell are you going to get a system up sanely (and | without tweaking /etc/portage/package.use) if besides the 350 global | U

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die

2005-10-05 Thread Brian Harring
Just an addendum to this... it went in, will be available in 2.0.51_rc4 and up. If you want all registered death funcs to kick in, EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS="$EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS the_name_of_your_func" or if you want just your func to run EBUILD_DEATH_HOOKS="the_name_of_your_func" CC'ing gentoo-dev,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die

2005-10-05 Thread Daniel Ostrow
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 13:47 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: > 2.0.51_rc4 And by 2.0.51_rc4 he really meant 2.0.53_rc4. :) -- Daniel Ostrow Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel} [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die

2005-10-05 Thread Aron Griffis
Brian Harring wrote:[Wed Oct 05 2005, 02:47:09PM EDT] > diefunc() { > local funcname="$1" lineno="$2" exitcode="$3" > shift 3 > @@ -289,6 +291,7 @@ > echo "!!! ${*:-(no error message)}" >&2 > echo "!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT thi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] allow extra info to be echod on die

2005-10-05 Thread Brian Harring
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 03:04:23PM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote: > Brian Harring wrote: [Wed Oct 05 2005, 02:47:09PM EDT] > >> diefunc() { > >> local funcname="$1" lineno="$2" exitcode="$3" > >> shift 3 > >> @@ -289,6 +291,7 @@ > >> echo "!!! ${*:-(no error message)}" >&2 > >

[gentoo-dev] killsoft - Resignation

2005-10-05 Thread Robb Romans
Hi, Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to Gentoo for the time I have been here. Other tasks have recently prevented me from devoting adequate time to Gentoo. Rather than do a poor job, I feel it would be better to discontinue being an official developer. Please delete any Gentoo develop