Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Michał Górny
On Sun, 20 Dec 2015 00:56:39 +0100 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Dec 2015, Michał Górny wrote: > > >> set -f > >> echo -e ${DOC_CONTENTS} | ... > >> > >> versus: > >> > >> read -d '' -r -a DOC_CONTENTS <<<"${DOC_CONTENTS}" > >> echo -e "${DOC_CONTENTS[*]}" | ... > >> > >> The sec

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Andrew Savchenko
On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 18:47:45 -0500 Jonathan Callen wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 12/19/2015 05:56 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Sat, 19 Dec 2015 23:51:47 +0100 Ulrich Mueller > > wrote: > > > >>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2015, Michał Górny wrote: > >> > (I gu

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2015, Michał Górny wrote: > Feel free to use $'\0' if that makes it more explicit for you. This is even worse. The null character cannot be passed as an argument because it is the string terminator. No, I won't use the "read" variant at all, because it is an unreadable and gr

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 20 grudnia 2015 11:31:58 CET, Ulrich Mueller napisał(a): >> On Sun, 20 Dec 2015, Michał Górny wrote: > >> Feel free to use $'\0' if that makes it more explicit for you. > >This is even worse. The null character cannot be passed as an argument >because it is the string terminator. No, I wo

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2015, Michał Górny wrote: >> Besides, the "set -f" code in the eclass works just fine and has >> been tested for several years by now. > Sure. Relying on implicit word splitting which is a side effect of > unquoted variable use, along with disabling side effects of that use >

[gentoo-dev] Re: Ban package.provided in next EAPI?

2015-12-20 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Mon, 30 Nov 2015, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > package.provided is listed in PMS as "strongly deprecated" and > "optional" since a long time. Does anybody still need the file as part > of a profile, or could we finally ban it in the next EAPI? Bug 568884 now. pgp5Fo08TEQEx.pgp Description:

Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc-5 news item wrt C++ ABI

2015-12-20 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > Title: GCC 5 Defaults to the New C++11 ABI > Author: Mike Frysinger > Content-Type: text/plain > Posted: 2015-10-02 > Revision: 1 > News-Item-Format: 1.0 > Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-5 > > GCC 5 uses the new C++ ABI by default.

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2015-12-20 23:59 UTC

2015-12-20 Thread Robin H. Johnson
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2015-12-20 23:59 UTC. Removals: app-pda/libopensync 20151116-16:12 kensington fc5401a app-pda/libopensync-plugin-file 20151116-16:12 kensington fc5401a app-pda/libopensyn

[gentoo-dev] Re: repo/gentoo.git, or how committing is challenging

2015-12-20 Thread Ryan Hill
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 19:00:45 -0800 Brian Dolbec wrote: > But, one of the biggest things keeping me from doing more work on it > when I do have some time, is the fact that barely any of the devs seem > to care (other than the OP, who just seems to bitch about everything > not working for him). S

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Pacho Ramos
El dom, 20-12-2015 a las 13:13 +0100, Ulrich Mueller escribió: > > > > > > On Sun, 20 Dec 2015, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > Besides, the "set -f" code in the eclass works just fine and has > > > been tested for several years by now. > > > Sure. Relying on implicit word splitting which is a side e

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] readme.gentoo-r1.eclass: Do not inherit eutils.

2015-12-20 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El dom, 20-12-2015 a las 13:13 +0100, Ulrich Mueller escribió: >> I think we should end this discussion here. Let the eclass >> maintainer decide what approach (if any) he wants to adopt. > I prefer to keep the original behavior as ulm patch did :|