On 15 August 2013 00:42, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 08/15/2013 04:21 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 14 August 2013 21:17, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, hasufell wrote:
>>>
And their lack of time (to be polite) should not block general
progress in gentoo.
El jue, 15-08-2013 a las 07:42 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> On 08/15/2013 04:21 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > On 14 August 2013 21:17, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, hasufell wrote:
> >>
> >>> And their lack of time (to be polite) should not block general
> >>>
El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 23:53 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
[...]
> Well, it should reflect reality.
>
> PMS is still broken as much as it does not reflect the state of portage
> before PMS was written, and we've had to patch it up a few times to make
> it coherent, plus it is still lacking half
El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 15:17 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:07:32 +0400
> Sergey Popov wrote:
> > I am all for the standarts, but as we did not brought sets to PMS
> > yet(when we updated it for EAPI changes), my question is: 'why?'. It
> > is one of the long-standing
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:10:02 +0200
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 23:53 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> [...]
> > Well, it should reflect reality.
> >
> > PMS is still broken as much as it does not reflect the state of
> > portage before PMS was written, and we've had to patch it
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> I don't fully understand why things (like in_iuse from
> eutils.eclass) are missing from PMS.
How should this feature have made it into PMS by now? AFAICS, you've
first proposed it in the following posting, two days after EAPI 5 was
approved:
http:/
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:10 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 23:53 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> [...]
>> Well, it should reflect reality.
>>
>> PMS is still broken as much as it does not reflect the state of portage
>> before PMS was written, and we've had to patch it up a fe
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 03:28:49 + (UTC)
"Patrick Lauer (patrick)" wrote:
> patrick 13/08/15 03:28:49
>
> Modified: httpunit-1.6.2-r3.ebuild ChangeLog
> Log:
> Fix src_unpack/src_prepare
>
> (Portage version: 2.2.0/cvs/Linux x86_64, unsigned Manifest commit)
>
> Revis
On 08/15/2013 03:15 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 15 August 2013 00:42, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> On 08/15/2013 04:21 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> On 14 August 2013 21:17, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, hasufell wrote:
> And their lack of time (to be polite)
Dnia 2013-08-15, o godz. 11:09:50
Tom Wijsman napisał(a):
> On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:10:02 +0200
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> > El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 23:53 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> > [...]
> > > Well, it should reflect reality.
> > >
> > > PMS is still broken as much as it does not reflec
Dnia 2013-08-15, o godz. 11:10:31
Ulrich Mueller napisał(a):
> > On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> > I don't fully understand why things (like in_iuse from
> > eutils.eclass) are missing from PMS.
>
> How should this feature have made it into PMS by now? AFAICS, you've
> first pro
Dnia 2013-08-15, o godz. 10:04:47
Pacho Ramos napisał(a):
> El jue, 15-08-2013 a las 07:42 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> > I'm quite surprised that you attack hasufell now for his valid opinion
> > that PMS is not well maintained and does not reflect reality adequately.
> >
>
> Wouldn't be m
2013/8/14 heroxbd :
> Daniel Campbell writes:
>
>> I'm not a developer but this project's existence would motivate me to
>> get a compatible smartphone and test this new Gentoo version on it,
>> assuming it's also capable of standard phone calls and texts, etc.
>
> This assumption certainly holds
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:12:31 +0200
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 15:17 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:07:32 +0400
> > Sergey Popov wrote:
> > > I am all for the standarts, but as we did not brought sets to PMS
> > > yet(when we updated it for EAPI chan
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 10:04:47 +0200
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Wouldn't be much easy to try to get sets support approved for the next
> eapi? (eapi6 I think). Once we get the usual problems, we can complain
> but, who knows, maybe (as it's already implemented in a PM) it doesn't
> take so long to get app
On Wednesday 14 of August 2013 21:42:35 Michael Palimaka wrote:
| Now that portage-2.2 is in ~arch, we should now be able to add sets to
| the tree.
|
| How should we go about doing this? In some overlays, the repository root
| has sets/{foo,bar,etc} and sets.conf which might look like this:
|
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/11/2013 04:30 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-11, o godz. 20:59:01
> Tom Wijsman napisał(a):
>
>> On Sun, 11 Aug 2013 13:29:16 -0500
>> William Hubbs wrote:
>>
>>> I am splitting this to a separate thread, because it could become a
>>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/13/2013 01:21 AM, heroxbd wrote:
> Dear Fellows,
>
> Canonical is raising money by pushing their concept of Ubuntu for
> Android[1][2]. The idea is to put GNU environment (esp. Ubuntu userland)
> in parallel to Android to drive the external HDMI
18 matches
Mail list logo
