On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:22:43 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> Before people start asking I should explain why I started this:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=458638
>
> I think having such an eclass has several advantages over
> autootools-multilib.eclass (which depends on autotools-utils.eclas
On 24/02/2013 11:06, Michał Górny wrote:
> Then don't put 'autotools' in the name.
+1
> Yes, everyone sees 'a bit more' but nobody so far was able to point
> what it is exactly. Or people simply don't know what PMS does nowadays.
I've been trying to get myself to use autotools-utils more often l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
# Markos Chandras (24 Feb 2013)
# Not functional as cia.vc is gone
# No maintainer, dead upstream, last bump in 2005
# See #445644. Removal in 30 days
dev-util/ciabot-svn
- --
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/24/2013 11:11 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 24/02/2013 11:06, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Then don't put 'autotools' in the name.
>
> +1
>
That would be multilib-minimal.eclass then?
I find that name silly, but I don't have a better idea.
A
I would like to ask about adding "systemd" USE flag to use.stable.mask
to let us stop needing to revbump packages with optional systemd support
when stabilizing them.
Are you ok with that?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 15:17 +0100, hasufell escribió:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 02/24/2013 11:11 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > On 24/02/2013 11:06, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> Then don't put 'autotools' in the name.
> >
> > +1
> >
>
> That would be multilib-mi
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> I would like to ask about adding "systemd" USE flag to use.stable.mask
> to let us stop needing to revbump packages with optional systemd support
> when stabilizing them.
>
> Are you ok with that?
Am I interpreting the impacts of this correctl
El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 09:35 -0500, Rich Freeman escribió:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > I would like to ask about adding "systemd" USE flag to use.stable.mask
> > to let us stop needing to revbump packages with optional systemd support
> > when stabilizing them.
> >
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:22:43 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> Before people start asking I should explain why I started this:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=458638
>
> I think having such an eclass has several advantages over
> autootools-multilib.eclass (which depends on autotools-utils.eclas
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 15:23:52 +0100
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> I would like to ask about adding "systemd" USE flag to use.stable.mask
> to let us stop needing to revbump packages with optional systemd support
> when stabilizing them.
>
> Are you ok with that?
Ok, committed that myself ;).
--
Best re
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 09:35:27 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > I would like to ask about adding "systemd" USE flag to use.stable.mask
> > to let us stop needing to revbump packages with optional systemd support
> > when stabilizing them.
> >
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/24/2013 03:57 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:22:43 +0100 hasufell
> wrote:
>
>> Before people start asking I should explain why I started this:
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=458638
>>
>> I think having such an e
El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 15:57 +0100, Michał Górny escribió:
[...]
> > d) the previous point will also allow to convert go-mono.eclass packages
> > without introducing yet another eclass for that
>
> So you're introducing a hacky eclass just because you're too lazy to
> convert go-mono packages pr
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> Isn't there any way to unmask systemd USE flag on your local setup
> (running testing systemd)?
>
Wasn't aware that could be done. That makes sense all-around - it
even allows you to run the stable packages with the unstable flag
(which wou
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:12:18 +0100
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 15:57 +0100, Michał Górny escribió:
> [...]
> > > d) the previous point will also allow to convert go-mono.eclass packages
> > > without introducing yet another eclass for that
> >
> > So you're introducing a hacky
El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 16:53 +0100, Michał Górny escribió:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:12:18 +0100
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> > El dom, 24-02-2013 a las 15:57 +0100, Michał Górny escribió:
> > [...]
> > > > d) the previous point will also allow to convert go-mono.eclass packages
> > > > without intr
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 01:34:47 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> Some people seem to feel uncomfortable with autotools-multilib,
> because it depends on autotools-utils.
To be honest, I don't particularly like autotools-utils, I tend to
consider it a useless bloat. However, Michal's work on
autotools-multil
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:53:02 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> - prune_libtool_files in src_install() which most people want to do
> anyway, so that doesn't hurt -- and the pkg-config dep is going to
> be removed, by the patch I sent already.
A bit OT but that's one of the things I consider useles
On 02/24/2013 05:22 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 01:34:47 +0100
> hasufell wrote:
>
>> Some people seem to feel uncomfortable with autotools-multilib,
>> because it depends on autotools-utils.
>
> To be honest, I don't particularly like autotools-utils, I tend to
> consider it
On 24/02/13 17:53, Michał Górny wrote:
I still try to use plain ebuilds without
inheritting autotools-utils.eclass as I usually don't need it, probably
others do the same and refuse to have to inherit it only for multilib
support :/ How do you plan to solve this problem?
You generally have two
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/24/2013 10:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> I think that base.eclass is silently intended for removal at some
> point in the future. While we're here, we should probably mark it
> deprecated.
>
The problem with deprecating base.eclass and telling
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 13:05:51 -0500
Jonathan Callen wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 02/24/2013 10:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > I think that base.eclass is silently intended for removal at some
> > point in the fu
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 17:42:26 +0100
hasufell wrote:
[...]
> I have no idea if it makes sense for this package (since it also
> installs binaries), but as an example I have converted dev-libs/serd.
yes, that's the kind of usage of your eclass I was thinking about :)
(it might make sense to convert
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:58:08 +0200
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 24/02/13 17:53, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> I still try to use plain ebuilds without
> >> inheritting autotools-utils.eclass as I usually don't need it, probably
> >> others do the same and refuse to have to inherit it only for multilib
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/24/2013 07:56 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> It's that "Plus" part that is my problem with
>> autotools-multilib.eclass currently, it adds EXPORT_FUNCTIONS of
>> src_prepare() from autotools-utils.eclass which is irrelevant to
>> the autotools-multil
Looks like great work so far.
On 11.02.2013 01:20, Michał Górny wrote:
> Secondly, I'd like to make it clear that the old python.eclass is
> 'almost' deprecated. We're in process of converting the in-tree
> packages to use the new eclasses but that's a lot of work [3].
>
> [..]
>
> [3]:http:/
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:52:45 +0100
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Looks like great work so far.
>
>
> On 11.02.2013 01:20, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Secondly, I'd like to make it clear that the old python.eclass is
> > 'almost' deprecated. We're in process of converting the in-tree
> > packages to
On 24/02/13 02:34, hasufell wrote:
Some people seem to feel uncomfortable with autotools-multilib, because
it depends on autotools-utils.
Instead of arguing whether it makes sense or not I'd propose a similar
autotools related eclass.
I also attach an example conversion of media-libs/libexif (t
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2013-02-24 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
www-apache/mod_vhs 2013-02-20 23:31:04 pinkbyte
dev-haskell/wash2013-02-22 09:27:03 moult
dev-libs/libole2
(I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
here, so...)
So I'm playing with net-fs/samba-4.0.3, AD and kerberos, and tried to
enable kerberos system-wide on my server.
No joy, as net-fs/nfs-utils has an
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
> here, so...)
>
> So I'm playing with net-fs/samba-4.0.3, AD and kerberos, and tried to
> enable kerbero
On 02/24/2013 09:48 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
>> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
>> here, so...)
>>
>> So I'm playing with net-fs/samba-4.0
Michael Mol posted on Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:17:56 -0500 as excerpted:
>> I'm not following you here. 'slot' means a very specific thing. You are
>> not actually suggesting we use SLOT, you simply want both versions of
>> the library to be installed in one ROOT?
>>
>> I would not advocate this appro
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On 02/24/2013 09:48 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
>>> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
On 02/24/2013 10:40 PM, Duncan wrote:
> Michael Mol posted on Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:17:56 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>>> I'm not following you here. 'slot' means a very specific thing. You are
>>> not actually suggesting we use SLOT, you simply want both versions of
>>> the library to be installed in one
On 02/24/2013 10:46 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On 02/24/2013 09:48 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
(I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
now, but I believe
I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open bugs
blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good time
to take a look at them.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/390247
--
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgetslearn a language baby, it's that kind of pl
On 25 Feb 2013 06:53, "Ryan Hill" wrote:
>
> I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open
bugs
> blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good time
> to take a look at them.
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/390247
Can't you just smell all those Gentoo s
On 02/24/13 20:25, Michael Mol wrote:
> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
> here, so...)
>
> So I'm playing with net-fs/samba-4.0.3, AD and kerberos, and tried to
> enable kerberos system-wide
On 02/24/13 23:45, Alex Alexander wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2013 06:53, "Ryan Hill" wrote:
>>
>> I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open
> bugs
>> blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good time
>> to take a look at them.
>>
>> https://bugs.gentoo.
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 09:25:37PM -0500, Michael Mol wrote:
> 2) Is it possible to slot mit-krb5 and heimdal instead of pulling them
> through a virtual? My suspicion is "no", but I don't know enough about
> kerberos to say whether or not it would work, even as a hack.
You can't eselect the kerbe
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Matthew Thode
wrote:
> On 02/24/13 20:25, Michael Mol wrote:
>> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
>> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
>> here, so...)
>>
>> So I'm playing with net-fs/samba-4.0.3
On 02/25/13 01:43, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Matthew Thode
> wrote:
>> On 02/24/13 20:25, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> (I really don't have time to actively participate on this list right
>>> now, but I believe that if I bring it up on b.g.o, I'll be directed
>>> here, so...
43 matches
Mail list logo
