Make tc-getBUILD* functions respect host variables (CC & co.) when
not cross-compiling. This removes the necessity of overriding BUILD_*
along with the regular variables on the systems that are not concerned
about cross-compilation, and does not change the behavior for those
which are.
Closes: htt
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, R0b0t1 wrote:
> Downloading does not imply committing a felony. As far as anyone can
> tell it is impossible to prosecute someone for downloading something
> they already own (regardless of what any EULA has claimed).
Sure, if the user already has rightfully obtained th
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Maybe find yourself a lawyer, and ask him. We're all volunteers,
I've already done the research. There is no legal requirement to
contact the authors before changing the SRC_URI.
> and we're no in way obligated to give legal advices to you
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> W dniu czw, 07.09.2017 o godzinie 16∶42 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman
>> napisał:
>>> Are you saying it is sufficient to just point the SRC_URI at the
>>> new URL and remove the mask? As far as
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
> Quoting from "all-rights-reserved":
>
> | This package has an explicit "all rights reserved" clause, or comes
> | without any license, or only with a disclaimer. This means that you
> | have only the rights that are granted to you by law. I
EAPI 7 is introducing new version manipulation and comparison functions
that aim to replace versionator.eclass. This eclass provides an 'early
adopter' versions of those routines.
It serves two goals:
a. getting wider review and some real-life testing before
the specification is set in stone, and
Michał Górny wrote:
> +# 1.2b-alpha4 -> 1 . 2 '' b - alpha '' 4
Is this only to explain the syntax or are there plans to
extend the allowed versions for pms?
There is a reason why pms currently does not allow "-" as separators
within versions (with the exception of -r):
With this general synt
W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 12∶38 +, użytkownik Chí-Thanh
Christopher Nguyễn napisał:
> commit: 87929d9f6bfe62770cb13547583425e6f2755a59
> Author: Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn gentoo org>
> AuthorDate: Fri Sep 8 12:38:21 2017 +
> Commit: Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn ge
W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 12∶48 +, użytkownik Martin Vaeth
napisał:
> Michał Górny wrote:
> > +# 1.2b-alpha4 -> 1 . 2 '' b - alpha '' 4
>
> Is this only to explain the syntax or are there plans to
> extend the allowed versions for pms?
>
It only explains how the functions parse st
On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 14:54:10 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 12∶48 +, użytkownik Martin Vaeth
> napisał:
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > +# 1.2b-alpha4 -> 1 . 2 '' b - alpha '' 4
> >
> > Is this only to explain the syntax or are there plans to
> > extend the
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Michał Górny wrote:
> +# A version component can either consist purely of digits ([0-9]+) or
> +# purely of uppercase and lowercase letters ([a-zA-Z]+). Any other
> +# character is treated as a version separator.
Minor documentation nitpick (sorry for not noticing this e
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Sep 2017 14:54:10 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>> It only explains how the functions parse stuff (except for ver_test
>> which uses PMS rules). They are by definition supposed to work with
>> random upstream versions.
> This sounds lik
On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:01:08 -0400
"William L. Thomson Jr." wrote:
> This is more food for thought to start a discussion on new category
> names. With Wayland becoming more of a reality every day. I think some
> of the x11-* categories may need to change. Stuff in there may not be
> bound to X an
On Friday, September 8, 2017, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> Downloading does not imply committing a felony. As far as anyone can
>> tell it is impossible to prosecute someone for downloading something
>> they already own (regardless of what any EULA has claim
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:11:51 -0500
R0b0t1 wrote:
> Then I'm quite confused as to why people seem to be extremely attentive to
> copyright infringement (besides an immediate payout). In the US they cite
> the reasoning I gave, from memory.
>
> Maybe that was for trademarks?
This is one of those p
On Sat, 9 Sep 2017 03:56:38 +1200
Kent Fredric wrote:
> > >> Sir, please see my above comment about building ballistic
> > >> missiles. It may be important for the Gentoo Foundation to add a
> > >> disclaimer similar to the one I mentioned. I would hate for the
> > >> Foundation or any of its admi
And this is all irrelevant since the copyright applies to the software, not
the location you obtain it from. Nobody commits copyright infringement by
buying a used book from their neighbour instead of buying it at Half Price
Books.
Distribution licenses are another thing, but if the original SRC_UR
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 11:10:54 -0500
Gordon Pettey wrote:
> And this is all irrelevant since the copyright applies to the
> software, not the location you obtain it from. Nobody commits
> copyright infringement by buying a used book from their neighbour
> instead of buying it at Half Price Books.
> D
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 11:10:54 -0500
Gordon Pettey wrote:
> Distribution licenses are another thing, but if the original SRC_URI from
> the ebuild wasn't RESTICT="fetch", what makes anybody think that would
> suddenly change with a new SRC_URI?
I've seen terms that state people aren't allowed to re
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Ciaran McCreesh <
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 11:10:54 -0500
> Gordon Pettey wrote:
> > And this is all irrelevant since the copyright applies to the
> > software, not the location you obtain it from. Nobody commits
> > copyright in
Upstream no longer maintain (Bug#628908).
Removal in 30 days.
Complex build system, hard to maintain, no dependencies in tree, upstream
does not cooperate (Bug#630420).
Removal in 30 days.
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Complex build system, hard to maintain, no dependencies in tree, upstream
> does not cooperate (Bug#630420).
> Removal in 30 days.
>
I don't have any reason to disagree with this but I expected a
citation for those things to be in the bug you
On 8 September 2017 at 22:44, R0b0t1 wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> > Complex build system, hard to maintain, no dependencies in tree, upstream
> > does not cooperate (Bug#630420).
> > Removal in 30 days.
> >
>
> I don't have any reason to disagree with this but
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being
> covered?
>
FYI - if anybody does want to make any comments on the proposed
devmanual changes to implement the new tags please comment at:
https://github.com/gentoo/devma
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:33:11 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Make tc-getBUILD* functions respect host variables (CC & co.) when
> not cross-compiling. This removes the necessity of overriding BUILD_*
> along with the regular variables on the systems that are not concerned
> about cross-compilation, a
This is really messy at the moment because I'm not sure whether the vim
team is interested, and I didn't want to put in the effort if it's just
going to be rejected, but I'm posting what I have here to start some
kind of discussion.
At the moment functions/other things need to be described, among
DEPENDS part and "binary" function makes me sad panda:
they assumes there are no "vims" exist, while there is at least `vim-qt`
(well, actually that one is dropped from gentoo) and `neovim-qt` (and that one
is in overlays, but anyway), and so on.
I think, it'd be nice to somehow avoid exact bina
On 09/08/2017 11:19 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> FYI - if anybody does want to make any comments on the proposed
> devmanual changes to implement the new tags please comment at:
>
> https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org/pull/72
>
> For that matter, if you want to even know what the proposed
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:11:51 -0500
> R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> Then I'm quite confused as to why people seem to be extremely attentive to
>> copyright infringement (besides an immediate payout). In the US they cite
>> the reasoning I gave, from memor
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 8:33 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:11:51 -0500
>> R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>>> Then I'm quite confused as to why people seem to be extremely attentive to
>>> copyright infringement (besides an immediate payout). I
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On 8 September 2017 at 22:44, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> > Complex build system, hard to maintain, no dependencies in tree, upstream
>> > does not cooperate (Bug#630420).
>> > Removal in 30 days
- On 7 Sep, 2017, at 10:53 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wlt...@o-sinc.com
wrote:
>
> In an ideal sense, equipment like this would go to something like OSU
> OSL or some other hosting provider. Though there is the cost of
> bandwidth, power, and man power to service hardware issues. Not to
>
33 matches
Mail list logo
