On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:27:49 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> No, I'm just saying this:
>
> We don't know that there is a portage bug from what I'm reading in this
> thread. We are talking about possible bugs, but a possible bug isn't a bug.
> If there is an issue cite it otherwise move on.
>
> -
Hi,
The following package is now looking for a new home:
app-text/openlp
It has no bugs reported, and is at the newest version available
upstream.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 09:19:14PM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 12:27:49 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > No, I'm just saying this:
> >
> > We don't know that there is a portage bug from what I'm reading in this
> > thread. We are talking about possible bugs, but a possibl
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 09:26:09AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> There's no way to know whether removing virtual/rust will cause these
> kinds of issues, so I'm still not convinced that we shouldn't remove it.
Sorry, I meant virtual/cargo here.
William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signatu
On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 09:26:09 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> I don't know portage internals, so I have no idea what the deal with
> this is or how to fix it.
>
> Did you report it to the portage team?
Report what?
1. Didn't have access to the box
2. No way to even conceive of producing enough inf
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 03:49:32AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 09:26:09 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > I don't know portage internals, so I have no idea what the deal with
> > this is or how to fix it.
> >
> > Did you report it to the portage team?
>
> Report what?
>
>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 10:52:35 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> If not, I would rather see you pick one of the two options above.
-r1 bump all existing consumers of that eclass first? :)
pgpOohqnJQZK6.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 10/29/19 19:08, Patrick McLean wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 23:03:15 +
> James Le Cuirot wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:23:20 -0700
>> Patrick McLean wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 16:10:37 +0100
>>> Andreas Sturmlechner wrote:
>>>
Anyone else who thinks this should n
