> On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
> I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we
> kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
> that the mangler were allowed to find the EAPI without sourcing (and
> giving the restrictions) once portage
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Let's assume for the moment that we change from ".ebuild" to ".eb".
Then we obviously cannot change all ebuilds in the tree to ".eb",
otherwise old Portage versions would see an empty tree and there would
be no upgrade path.
Or am I missing something?
That is a good poin
On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 11:25:54PM +0200, Dawid W??gli??ski wrote:
> On Monday 01 of June 2009 06:25:06 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> > Hello fellow developers and users.
> >
>
> I nominate:
>
> Betelgeuse
> Calchan
> peper
> darkside
> tanderson
> Cardoe
>
Thanks Dawid, Mounir, and Tizia
On Sunday 07 June 2009 11:34:12 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
> >
> > I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we
> > kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
> > that the mangler were allowed to find the EA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
>
>> I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if we
>> kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
>> that the mangler were allowed to fi
Richard Freeman posted 4a2baaa9.4030...@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on Sun, 07 Jun 2009 07:55:21 -0400:
> As far as an upgrade path goes - we could provide a one-time tarball
> that will update portage (and its essential dependencies) to a version
> that can get users out of this bind. If a us
Patrick Lauer wrote:
And if you really absolutely have to do that you can change the sync
location on every disruptive change, but (imo) that should be
avoided.
If mirroring and other practical concerns weren't an issue what you're
essentially describing is just moving to a CVS/git/etc reposit
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> ...
>>> A quick scan shows that the following eclasses were deprecated more
>>> than three years ago, and are used by no ebuild in the tree:
>>>
>>>2002-05-25 inherit.eclass
>>>2003-12-11 kde-i18n.eclass
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2009.06.07 10:34, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 07 Jun 2009, Steven J Long wrote:
>
> > I'd just like to know what the implications would be for users if
> we
> > kept the .ebuild extension, and a new PMS were rolled out stating
> > that t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Anderson wrote:
...
... please remember to vote for gentoofan23, not tanderson(irc nick). ;-)
>
> Regards,
> Thomas
This is why everyone should verify their votes when submitting them.
Don't forget to run:
$ votify --verify
If you use a
Seriously, let's stop.
This endless debate has gone on for waaay too long and it is just plain
spam now.
I'm just too tired of reading those endless discussions that are going
_nowhere_.
Let's just all agree we've failed to reach a consensus and let's spend
time on something else.
Surely
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2009.06.07 16:54, Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Seriously, let's stop.
>
> This endless debate has gone on for waaay too long and it is just
> plain
> spam now.
[snip]
> Let's just all agree we've failed to reach a consensus and let's
> spend time on s
Hi folks,
This is a summary of how to detect Baselayout-2/OpenRC from within
init.d scripts. We raised it in January, without any actual final
agreement:
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_5959bcfaf3ba566c551823039643f5c5.xml
Also, there were some items that weren't raised in the previous
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> GDP team:
> (I didn't hear from you in the bug)
> Could you please update:
> - handbook section "Writing Init scripts"
> - OpenRC migration guide
ACK on this one, we are already overwhelmed by openrc changes wrt init
scripts at media teams. Or at least, I am.
Thanks, Sam
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> GDP team:
>> (I didn't hear from you in the bug)
>> Could you please update:
>> - handbook section "Writing Init scripts"
>> - OpenRC migration guide
>
> ACK on this one, we are already overwhelmed by openrc changes wrt init
> scripts at media te
Josh Saddler wrote:
Also, if OpenRC/baselayout is dropping support for things like PPP or
ADSL[1], and will not guarantee a "stable" configuration (i.e. as
"final" as baselayout-1 has been, not needing constant user-side
updates)[2] . . . then we need to find some other solution for our users.
> On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, Robin H Johnson wrote:
> 2. Right now, every init.d script that needs to detection should revbump
>and change to the following:
>[[ -f /lib/librc.so -o -f /etc/init.d/sysfs -o -f /libexec/rc/version ]]
Wasn't the convention for init scripts to use only single squ
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:02:44AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, Robin H Johnson wrote:
> > 2. Right now, every init.d script that needs to detection should revbump
> >and change to the following:
> >[[ -f /lib/librc.so -o -f /etc/init.d/sysfs -o -f /libexec/rc/ve
On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 01:45:15PM -0700, Josh Saddler wrote:
> Then, my fellow developers, ya'll need to tell us exactly what needs to
> change. That has not yet happened on the bugs, just a lot of offtopic
> discussion relevant to the package maintainers, but not to the GDP for
> documentation pu
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:02:44AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, Robin H Johnson wrote:
2. Right now, every init.d script that needs to detection should revbump
and change to the following:
[[ -f /lib/librc.so -o -f /etc/init.d/sysfs -o -f /libex
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> [stuff]
Thanks, will take a look.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:00:59AM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
>> Roy: [[ or [?
> Entirely depends on system.
> OpenRC uses /bin/sh to process the actual init script. We rely on /bin/sh
> claiming POSIX compat [1]. On Gentoo Linux systems, this is normally a link
> to bash, so you can use bashisms
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2009-06-07 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
x11-misc/basket 2009-06-01 01:27:53 tampakrap
media-libs/libspiff 2009-06-01 16:08:39 ssuominen
x11-misc/ope
> On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, Robin H Johnson wrote:
> Is "[[" a bashism or not? That's all I'm asking.
/bin/sh under FreeBSD 7.0:
$ [[ -n "foo" ]]
[[: not found
Ulrich
24 matches
Mail list logo
