Following are three minor changes to texlive-(common|module).eclass,
which I expect to be the last changes to the eclasses before start
moving texlive 2023 from ::tex-overlay into ::gentoo (initally
pmasked).
Florian Schmaus (3):
texlive-module.eclass: implicitly set TL_PV if not explicitly set
Signed-off-by: Florian Schmaus
---
eclass/texlive-module.eclass | 6 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/eclass/texlive-module.eclass b/eclass/texlive-module.eclass
index afcd4532975a..d1bf0f86185b 100644
--- a/eclass/texlive-module.eclass
+++ b/eclass/texlive-module.eclass
@@ -8
The texlive eclasses where traditionally lenient when it comes to the
exit status of texmf-update and fmtutil-sys, as they would return a
non-zero exit status in certain situations, especially when bootstraping
the texlive installation, i.e., when texlive-core is installed.
With the upcoming Texli
Signed-off-by: Florian Schmaus
---
eclass/texlive-common.eclass | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/eclass/texlive-common.eclass b/eclass/texlive-common.eclass
index 96e962cb8027..85cdb8ff204e 100644
--- a/eclass/texlive-common.eclass
+++ b/eclass/texlive-common.
On 29/02/2024 14.38, Florian Schmaus wrote:
Signed-off-by: Florian Schmaus
---
eclass/texlive-module.eclass | 6 ++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/eclass/texlive-module.eclass b/eclass/texlive-module.eclass
index afcd4532975a..d1bf0f86185b 100644
--- a/eclass/texlive-module
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 14:47 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> >
> > +if [[ -z ${TL_PV} ]] \
> > + && [[ ${EAPI} -ge 8 ]] \
>
> I am skeptical of this construct, as in the past we had non-numeric
> EAPIs. So I may have to go with EAPI == 8 for now. Input appreciated.
>
The eclass only sup
On 29/02/2024 15.08, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 14:47 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
+if [[ -z ${TL_PV} ]] \
+ && [[ ${EAPI} -ge 8 ]] \
I am skeptical of this construct, as in the past we had non-numeric
EAPIs. So I may have to go with EAPI == 8 for now. Input ap
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 15:21 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> >
> > The eclass only supports EAPIs {7,8,...} so it should suffice to
> > blacklist EAPI=7.
>
> Fair point, but that would mean to remember to adjust this line once the
> eclass gets support for EAPI 9.
>
It should do the right thing
On 29/02/2024 15.34, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 15:21 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
The eclass only supports EAPIs {7,8,...} so it should suffice to
blacklist EAPI=7.
Fair point, but that would mean to remember to adjust this line once the
eclass gets support for EAPI 9.
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 15:21 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 29/02/2024 15.08, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 14:47 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +if [[ -z ${TL_PV} ]] \
> > > > + && [[ ${EAPI} -ge 8 ]] \
> > >
> > > I am skeptical of this construc
On Thu, 2024-02-29 at 14:38 +0100, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Florian Schmaus
> ---
> eclass/texlive-common.eclass | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/eclass/texlive-common.eclass b/eclass/texlive-common.eclass
> index 96e962cb8027..85cdb8ff204
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024, Michał Górny wrote:
>> +"${EPREFIX}"/usr/bin/fmtutil-sys --all &> /dev/null \
>> +|| die -n "fmtutil-sys returned non-zero exit
>> status ${res}"
> Put '||' at end of the line, then you won't need the redundant
> backslas
> On Thu, 29 Feb 2024, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> @@ -178,6 +178,10 @@ etexmf-update() {
> if has_version 'app-text/texlive-core' ; then
> if [[ -z ${ROOT} && -x "${EPREFIX}"/usr/sbin/texmf-update ]] ;
> then
> "${EPREFIX}"/usr/sbin/texmf-update
> +
# Eli Schwartz (2024-02-29)
# Ancient fork of gmp from 2017. Various build issues, fails tests. All
# reverse dependencies turned out to be incorrect or preferred gmp
# anyways. No path forward to keeping it buildable, no use case for
# keeping it around. Bug #812950, #874537, #925308
# Removal o
Hi,
> Compare with the shitstorm at:
> https://github.com/pkgxdev/pantry/issues/5358
Thank you for this, it made my day.
Though I'm just a proxy maintainer for now, I also support this initiative,
there should be some guard rails set up around LLM usage.
> 1. Copyright concerns. At this point,
Matt Jolly writes:
>> But where do we draw the line? Are translation tools like DeepL
>> allowed? I don't see much of a copyright issue for these.
>
> I'd also like to jump in and play devil's advocate. There's a fair
> chance that this is because I just got back from a
> supercomputing/research
16 matches
Mail list logo
