Joshua Saddler wrote:
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:57:07 +0200
Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
Hi there!
As some of you have waited long for this to happen, sys-apps/openrc-0.5.1 is
there. It has a default enabled (eapi-1) useflag oldnet to install the
old-style network scripts called net.*.
Regard
On 10/9/09 7:57 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> * does new scripts already can do all that was possible with net.* ?
>
No. PPP is not compatible with the new scripts.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Alin Năstac wrote:
> On 10/9/09 7:57 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
>> * does new scripts already can do all that was possible with net.* ?
>>
> No. PPP is not compatible with the new scripts.
>
Major regression. It never pays to drop surprises on people like this
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 11:53:37AM +0200, Branko Badrljica wrote:
> Joshua Saddler wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 19:57:07 +0200
> > Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Hi there!
> >>
> >> As some of you have waited long for this to happen, sys-apps/openrc-0.5.1
> >> is
> >> there. It has
News item?
Will be/Wont be/In progress??
Hi,
lately I spoted that quite few packages have optional parts bit unstable (KDE
parts, boinc [i wont stable it until the cuda is, i wont do the work explained
bellow :)], kipi,...).
I really don't like the shebang about doing -r1 and -r50 so we keep 2
revisions where one is stableable and seco
On Samstag, 10. Oktober 2009, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Alin Năstac wrote:
> > On 10/9/09 7:57 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> >> * does new scripts already can do all that was possible with net.* ?
> >
> > No. PPP is not compatible with the new scripts.
>
> Major
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Hi,
> lately I spoted that quite few packages have optional parts bit unstable (KDE
> parts, boinc [i wont stable it until the cuda is, i wont do the work
> explained
> bellow :)], kipi,...).
> I really don't like the shebang about doing -r1 and -r50 so we keep 2
> revisi
Zac Medico wrote:
> Maybe a syntax extension for IUSE would be a little nicer. For example:
>
> IUSE="unstable? ( foo bar )"
>
> You could emulate this sort of extension in current EAPIs by simply
> adding IUSE="unstable" and then using that flag to conditionally
> disable things in *DEPEND, SR
On Saturday 10 of October 2009 22:50:37 Zac Medico wrote:
> Maybe a syntax extension for IUSE would be a little nicer. For example:
>
> IUSE="unstable? ( foo bar )"
No no no, the biggest reason for this is to not touch ebuild at all - it needs
to be fully ebuild independent.
It's like with re
Matthias Schwarzott posted on Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:57:07 +0200 as
excerpted:
> sys-apps/openrc-0.5.1
Just a heads-up for anyone reading this and thinking about upgrading, who
hasn't yet.
rc_start_wait is now in SECONDS, NOT the former MS, or at least it seems
to be for some of us. So at the de
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009 22:04:50 +0200
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Hi,
> lately I spoted that quite few packages have optional parts bit unstable (KDE
> parts, boinc [i wont stable it until the cuda is, i wont do the work
> explained bellow :)], kipi,...).
> I really don't like the shebang about doing -r
12 matches
Mail list logo
