On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 19:56 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 26 January 2007 17:19, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> i purposefully choose to not go this route because i dont want to start
> >> adding handling for arbitrary compression types ... when such a list
> >> exists,
Hi All!
In one week it will be time for our monthly Bugday event!
This is a reminder for you to buy your girlfriend some flowers, pay your
parents to clean your room and make sure you have power for the computer
and the net cable is plugged in! Join #Gentoo-Bugs on the Freenode IRC
network and h
# Raúl Porcel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (27 Jan 2007)
# Masked for removal 26 Feb 2007, bug 135257, security issues
# Replaced by www-client/seamonkey[-bin]
www-client/mozilla
www-client/mozilla-bin
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Raúl Porcel wrote:
> # Raúl Porcel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (27 Jan 2007)
> # Masked for removal 26 Feb 2007, bug 135257, security issues
> # Replaced by www-client/seamonkey[-bin]
> www-client/mozilla
> www-client/mozilla-bin
>
How about not breaking the tree?
!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "www
Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 23:37 +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
>> So to avoid thread hijacking, starting a new one.
>
> What exactly is this thread you are starting about? Just letting us know
> you did some random testing?
>
I think this is a reference to news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wher
Hi,
Since this is a different question which got buried in the other
discussion, I appreciate it should be a new thread:
I'm a bit confused about all the portage tree stuff. There's just under
25,000 ebuilds, which are maintained by about 100 devs (not sure of exact
number, taken from a forum p
Steve Long wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please note, I'm not talking about applications like portage or pkgcore,
> just the ebuild text files, which I understand have one maintainer?
>
Many ebuilds are in maintained by a bunch of people via herds.
>
> I appreciate that source control is needed to maintain f
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 13:11:07 +
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since this is a different question which got buried in the other
> discussion, I appreciate it should be a new thread:
>
> I'm a bit confused about all the portage tree stuff. There's just
> under 25,000 ebuilds
Steve Long wrote:
> I'm thinking in any case that a db app can save old revisions or use a svn
> backend. I'm looking at this from a workflow perspective, in terms
> especially of the security issue around giving commit access to the whole
> tree. If the individual maintainer only has permission
Hi,
besides a deprecated call to check_KV, matrox.eclass sets
SLOT=${KV}
which breaks the metadata cache. Any objections to change it
to
SLOT=0
anyone?
Danny
--
Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten wrote:
> What I propose is to copy licenses/GPL-2 to license/GPL-2+ and adding the
> following notes at the start of the two files:
>
> GPL-2:
> Note: this license states that the software is licensed under GNU General
> Public License version 2, and you might not be abl
Danny van Dyk napsal(a):
> which breaks the metadata cache. Any objections to change it
> to
>
> SLOT=0
As noted on the relevant bug [1], the eclass is a complete no-op and
nothing can be installed using this eclass (has been so for quite some
time). Fixing it doesn't make sense, making it dumm
Jakub Moc wrote:
> Danny van Dyk napsal(a):
>> which breaks the metadata cache. Any objections to change it
>> to
>>
>> SLOT=0
>
> As noted on the relevant bug [1], the eclass is a complete no-op and
> nothing can be installed using this eclass (has been so for quite some
> time). Fixing it does
13 matches
Mail list logo
