Hi
I would like to give some idea into consideration.
Abstract
In short, adding following new variables to make.conf and implement handling
of them in eclasses:
- CFLAGS_DEBUG (and friends like CXXFLAGS_DEBUG) - use defined debug compiler
flags - by default set to -O0 -ggdb (and maybe -Wall as
On Monday 01 of December 2008 08:04:04 Duncan wrote:
Well, so far it's not GLEP, just an idea thrown to brainstorm.
> As such, neither /etc/portage/env nor eclasses can effectively deal with
> FEATURES in general, tho there are a few specific exceptions that do
> happen to be implemented at the b
On Monday 01 of December 2008 09:36:12 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> > - USE=debug is useless when CFLAGS/LDFLAGS or FEATURES are not
> > appropriate
> What are you saying here? I'm afraid you're mistaken here.
The point is to look at this from users' (well, a bit) point of view -
USE=debug
On Monday 01 of December 2008 08:04:04 Duncan wrote:
> (Of
> course, if it's the latter, it will need to be an official GLEP, and
> you'll have three separate package managers and their developers to push
> the proposal thru to at least to general agreement, or the council will
> almost certainly r
On Monday 01 of December 2008 22:51:57 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Experience, manpower, the ability to try out potential enhancements
> rapidly, a long track record of getting it right and the growing
> recognition that most people doing package manager work for Gentoo
> aren't doing it with Portage
On Tuesday 02 of December 2008 10:40:19 Alec Warner wrote:
>
> You asked, so the counter proposal is to *do nothing*.
>
> Ideas (even good ones) don't always get implemented.
>
> Sometimes that just isn't the direction the maintainers want to take
> the project.
> Sometimes it is harder to imple
Following advise from https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250179, I'm
bringing it here.
--
regards
MM
--
Wygraj telefon komorkowy!
Sprawdz >> http://link.interia.pl/f1fc0
On Wednesday 31 of December 2008 15:33:14 Fabio Rossi wrote:
> Ok, but at the end we have an exception in the tree (/var/lib/gentoo/news/)
> which is not justified (looking at the current discussion). My proposal has
> arisen after having seen the /var/lib/gentoo/news/ hierarchy.
Then it seems wa
On Wednesday 31 of December 2008 16:57:12 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Gentoo does not comply with the FHS. It was established a long time ago
> that FHS is considered silly and any compliance is merely because the
> FHS people somehow managed to avoid screwing that particular area up.
Well, we're not
On Wednesday 31 of December 2008 17:28:09 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:21:45 +0100
>
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > On Wednesday 31 of December 2008 16:57:12 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Gentoo does not comply with the FHS. It was established a long ti
On Thursday 01 of January 2009 22:03:55 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> No, FHS is not the most commonly used layout. The traditional Unix
> layout is the most commonly used layout.
So.. why not blindly use Unix layout everywhere instead (for Gentoo news as
well)
On Thursday 01 of January 2009 22:37:28
On Thursday 01 of January 2009 23:15:20 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 23:07:08 +0100
> > So.. why not blindly use Unix layout everywhere instead (for Gentoo
> > news as well)
> We do.
/var/lib/gentoo/news
> Seriously, find something useful to change. I realise it's hard around
> he
On Thursday 15 of January 2009 09:12:12 Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> "Heath Caldwell (hncaldwell)" :
> > +
> > + Enable support for LaTeX
> > +
>
> You only have to add flags to metadata.xml, that are not in
> use.desc...and USE=latex is there with a
On Thursday 15 of January 2009 05:24:41 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> So if you want to know both, you need to look in 2 places? That doesn't
> seem very nice to me. Also in a distributed VCS, we'd want to generate
> ChangeLogs from the commit logs to avoid all kinds of annoying conflict
> resolution a
On Sunday 18 of January 2009 16:21:57 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> And yes, I'd really like to see this killed for EAPI 3. Ideally we'd go
> with a single DEPENDENCIES variable with labels of some kind,
> something like:
>
> DEPENDENCIES="
> build:
> foo/bar
> build+run
On Monday 02 of February 2009 22:15:53 Luca Barbato wrote:
> not sure how useful could be but could make more sense even if right now
> kde-base contains everything comes from the main kde distribution.
To be more specific, kde-base contains everything (and only) that is
distributed as KDE stabl
On Saturday 31 of January 2009 08:54:07 Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> and...
>
> The system-config-* collection
> --
[snip]
> app-admin/system-config-printer
> dev-python/pycups
Those two I'm maintaining in kde-testing overlay as they're prerequisites for
kde4 printing ad
On Sunday 08 of February 2009 19:51:29 Tiziano Müller wrote:
> It's metadata-stuff, why not put it there?
>
> You have two possibilities:
>
> a) Introduce new elements:
>
> foo
> bar
>
>
> b) Think of herds as tags, then you have many packages already tagged.
> To be able to add new herds/ta
On Tuesday 24 of February 2009 00:22:39 Josh Sled wrote:
> To that end, please allow me to suggest:
> "Cross-KDE support for file metadata indexing via nepomuk and soprano."
>
> If you don't want to couple the message to those particular packages,
> then maybe just reference the "NEPOMUK project"
On Monday 09 of March 2009 01:36:52 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > Plz fix the bug [1]
> >
> > [1] - http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=166730
In my opinion it's nowhere near locale specific bug, unless user sets
PORTAGE_TMPDIR to some path containing UTF-8 character beyond ASCII and having
brok
On Monday 09 of March 2009 22:36:33 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 22:33:11 +0100
>
> Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh :
> > > Next, some probably easy but long standing features:
> > >
> > > * src_test run unless RESTRICTed or explicitly disabled by the user
> > > (bug
On Tuesday 10 of March 2009 16:29:56 Alec Warner wrote:
> > With some devs reviewing gentoo-commits@, I highly doubt that this commit
> > could go unnoticed more than a few hours.
> really? cause I bet I could slip something in; now I'm motivated to try ;p
I somewhat share the view that's rather
On Wednesday 11 of March 2009 19:06:33 Thilo Bangert wrote:
> my complaint isn't about people using IRC. i object to the way that much
> of our knowledge, discussion and decision making process appear to have
> been moved into the temporal black hole that is IRC.
> realtime communication is an val
No idea whether it's "fast" idea, but:
- USE flags aliases
This could solve problems with USE flag name changes and breaking dependency
tree because of it.
Placed, let's say in profiles/{use.aliases,use.local.aliases}
example - use.aliases: (no idea whether global aliases are really needed)
#
On Monday 16 of March 2009 21:47:17 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I've got a very rough draft of what EAPI 3 might end up looking like,
> based upon discussion:
[cut]
Nice work.
To avoid further confusion I'd suggest removing all traces of kdebuild- format
and its features (like PDEPEND labels, ranged
On Sunday 22 of March 2009 18:18:15 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Mar 2009, mrness wrote:
> > Please do not apply patches that have ${P} prefix in other ebuild
> > versions than ${PV}.
> > Is that hard to create a new patch with a proper name?
> And multiply number and total size of fil
On Wednesday 25 of March 2009 15:19:36 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Being rude doesn't make you cool. (Nor make your points more
> > effective)
>
> That's not being rude.
[...]
(no comment)
> so you're doing them a
> discourtesy by wasting their time by repeatedly posting ideas you
> haven't though
On Monday 18 of May 2009 16:52:19 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 2009 17:47:52 +0300
[snip]
> The definition of soft behaviour allows soft blockers to be treated
> identically to hard blockers. We had to do it this way because
> Portage's rules for soft blockers are too fuzzy and arbitrary
On Monday 18 of May 2009 19:26:58 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 2009 19:15:59 +0200
>
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > Not sure who is 'we' there, but Portage team already made is useful.
> > Basic portage rule for soft-blocks behaviour is "no longer
On Sunday 24 of May 2009 01:14:57 Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> On 05/23/2009 05:56 PM, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
> > William Hubbs wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> My question for the group is, how do you feel about speech software
> >> being on our minimal cd as well as our live cd?
> >
> > I agree, it should be in
On Wednesday 22 of April 2009 15:35:37 Petteri Räty wrote:
> Here's an eclass proposal to wrap EXPORT_FUNCTIONS with auto detection
> of functions. This way all eclasses don't have to duplicate the EAPI
> detection code. If people find this useful, I will document it properly
> with eclass-manpages
Hi
I'd like to raise your attention on problem of in my opinion overusing IUSE
defaults in various packages.
Currently there seems to be no policy whatsoever at least advising when it's
appropriate to add + and when not, so it's just up to developer's
taste.
While it usually doesn't do any part
Hello
Somewhat continuing my battle to reasonably minimise USE flags enabled by
default for users, I'd like to ask about one particular commit. Note that
there's no commit message and it looks a bit fishy:
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-
x86/profiles/base/use.defaults?r1=1.1&r2=1.1
On Wednesday 01 of July 2009 17:14:11 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> Hello
>
> Somewhat continuing my battle to reasonably minimise USE flags enabled by
> default for users, I'd like to ask about one particular commit. Note that
> there's no commit message and it lo
On Monday 12 of March 2012 01:49:35 Brian Harring wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 04:14:33PM +0100, Ch??-Thanh Christopher Nguy???n
wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh schrieb:
> > >> Is there really much of a benefit to this? I guess for anybody who
> > >> runs scripts to mass-manipulate ebuilds it migh
On Monday 07 of May 2012 10:32:45 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 05/07/2012 02:24 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Therefore I suggest we move this example a bit down in skel.ebuild
> as it's more logical to continue with new lines instead of applying
> in-between
>
> Any objectio
On Tuesday 28 of August 2012 02:15:40 hasufell wrote:
> Is there a reason not to support static-libs in an ebuild if the package
> supports it?
>
> It seems some developers don't care about this option. What's the gentoo
> policy on this? Isn't this actually a bug?
A little remark.
For CMake cont
On Thursday 06 of September 2012 10:18:34 Brian Harring wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 10:54:15PM +0200, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > On Tuesday 28 of August 2012 02:15:40 hasufell wrote:
> > > Is there a reason not to support static-libs in an ebuild if the
> &g
On poniedziałek, 30 stycznia 2017 14:04:06 CET William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I have been looking at the meson build system [1] [2], and I like what I
> see.
>
> I have opened an issue on OpenRC's github wrt migrating OpenRC to the
> meson build system [3].
>
> As I said on the bug, the downsid
On Saturday 30 of April 2016 23:16:42 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
| Hi all,
|
| just as a small reminder, to ease the load on all arch teams:
|
| If a stablerequest has the keyword ALLARCHES set, then
| * the first arch that tests successfully and stabilizes
| * can and *should* immediately stabili
On Monday 02 of May 2016 16:43:01 you wrote:
| On Saturday 30 of April 2016 23:16:42 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
| | Hi all,
| |
| | just as a small reminder, to ease the load on all arch teams:
| |
| | If a stablerequest has the keyword ALLARCHES set, then
| | * the first arch that tests successfu
Hello,
General advise: do not convert ebuilds inheriting cmake-utils to EAPI 6 unless
you know what you are doing (you are fully aware of eclass behaviour removed
with https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=514384).
Background:
Pre EAPI-6 cmake-utils.eclass contained certain feature to mitiga
On Monday 02 of May 2016 18:06:44 you wrote:
> Unfortunately there is common misconception, also among developers, that
> it's sufficient to simply replace "${cmake-utils_use_with foo)" with
> "-DWITH_foo=ON" etc.
Obvious errata, should be:
Unfortunately there is common misconception, also among d
On Monday 02 of May 2016 18:13:38 you wrote:
> On Monday 02 of May 2016 18:06:44 you wrote:
> > Unfortunately there is common misconception, also among developers, that
> > it's sufficient to simply replace "${cmake-utils_use_with foo)" with
> > "-DWITH_foo=ON" etc.
>
> Obvious errata, should be:
On Wednesday 18 of May 2016 09:22:53 Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Mon, 02 May 2016 18:06:44 +0200 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > General advise: do not convert ebuilds inheriting cmake-utils to EAPI 6
> > unless you know what you are doing (you are fully aw
On środa, 2 listopada 2016 04:00:06 CET Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> ---
> eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass b/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
> index 88d2163..f7eac26 100644
> --- a/ecla
From: Maciej Mrozowski
Bummer, let me start it properly again, this time sending to reachable address.
Maciej Mrozowski (2):
cmake-utils.eclass: CMake argument passing rework - clean
build_rules and toolchain_file files from unrelated stuff (pass to
CMake directly) - move some
From: Maciej Mrozowski
---
eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 54 ++-
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass b/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
index 393ee28..88d2163 100644
--- a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
+++ b
From: Maciej Mrozowski
---
eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass b/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
index 88d2163..23cc094 100644
--- a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
+++ b/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
@@ -525,13 +525,13
On czwartek, 3 listopada 2016 07:31:10 CET Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 00:52:16 +0100
>
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > From: Maciej Mrozowski
> >
> > ---
> >
> > eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 54
> > ++---
gt; > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 00:52:17 +0100
> > > >
> > > > Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > > > > From: Maciej Mrozowski
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > >
On Sunday 27 of January 2013 19:11:16 Micha³ Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 21:04:14 +0300
>
> Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 17:30:22 +0100
> >
> > Micha³ Górny wrote:
> > > On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 16:07:48 +
> > >
> > > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 27 Jan 2013
On Tuesday 05 of February 2013 21:19:24 you wrote:
> +CMAKE_VERBOSE=1
This is already eclass default.
> + abi_configure() {
> + local mycmakeargs=(
> + "${mycmakeargs[@]}"
> + -DVGL_LIBDIR=/usr/$(get_libdir)
> + -DTJPEG_
On Thursday 07 of February 2013 06:52:44 Peter Stuge wrote:
> Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> > we as gentoo will provide both while preffered default will be what
> > major distros use.
>
> What kind of careless mainstream attitude is that? Really?
Quite the opposite, decision to use implementation A ove
On Tuesday 26 of February 2013 11:44:31 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
> > I see a *HUGE* reason. glibc ships with ptmalloc. If you think they
> > should use jemalloc, talk to them. Don't just do it in Gentoo.
>
> Certainly I think it would be far more
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:
|
On Friday 01 of November 2013 22:13:04 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| The point is that git makes it super-easy to contribute patches, both
| for users and for developers.
Well, it's not like one cannot submit patches against portage tree patches
already..
And git is only super-convenient when combine
On Sunday 15 of December 2013 00:13:09 Peter Stuge wrote:
| Markos Chandras wrote:
| > Please do not let Peter render another thread useless.
|
| Isn't it obvious that the discussion about forks is both related to
| cron *and* useful on its own?
I think there's some misunderstanding (or otherwise
On Friday 17 of January 2014 13:06:22 gro...@gentoo.org wrote:
| dev-util/kdevelop-php-docs
While of course it doesn't invalidate your entire idea, this particular example
is a kdevelop plugin written in C++ that provides php API documentation
integration.
This tells however that decision to "au
On Monday 24 of March 2014 16:28:44 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:55:38 -0400
| Damien Levac wrote:
| > A lot of people already replied to this question: package search.
|
| Sure, but can you point to prior examples of this kind of stuff
| actually working?
https://wiki.debian.
On Wednesday 26 of March 2014 02:07:56 Mike Frysinger wrote:
| cmake is completely broken when it comes to library searching and multilib
and
| cross-compiling. it will happily look in hardcoded / paths to test for the
| existence of files as well as directly execute `pkg-config`. it's a grea
On Tuesday 11 of August 2009 11:08:34 Robert Buchholz wrote:
> In my opinion, the entrance barrier for devs is lower on git.overlays,
> there is no signup, password, mail verification required. There's
> scripts to keep the ssh keys in LDAP and on git.overlays in sync, and
> people can just reques
On Tuesday 11 of August 2009 17:07:47 Arun Raghavan wrote:
> The advantage is primarily that we retain control of the
> infrastructure on which it (the official Gentoo project) is hosted.
Yes, and this is the problem.
That's probably why there's still no CIA.vc bot tracking kde-testing overlay
o
On Tuesday 11 of August 2009 19:38:48 Arun Raghavan wrote:
> This still does not address the original problem - if
> $external_service shuts down, is bought out, has arbitrary terms about
> content that are not immediately clear as being unfavourable to us,
> (at least) that part of the project wh
On Thursday 13 of August 2009 12:35:43 Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, den 12.08.2009, 23:55 -0600 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:56 +0100
> >
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
> > >
> > > Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> > > > Also we should allow t
On Friday 21 of August 2009 22:56:41 David Leverton wrote:
> Does anyone have any opinions on which of the four options (#1
> make die respect nonfatal, #2 make die always die, #3 add a new
> die variant that respects nonfatal, #4 make regular die respect
> nonfatal, and add a new variant that does
On Friday 21 of August 2009 23:12:23 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:09:33 +0200
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > I suggest #5 - drop the idea of 'nonfatal'.
> Then how do you plan to handle all the standard utilities that die on
> failure in EAPI
On Friday 21 of August 2009 23:46:38 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 23:42:11 +0200
> PMS accurately reflected the Portage documentation at the time it was
> written and at the time it was approved.
Agreed, but I think it was supposed to reflect Portage 'behaviour' at the
time. Of co
On Saturday 22 of August 2009 01:06:30 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 01:01:48 +0200
>
> Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > That being said I don't like refraining from "return value approach"
> > towards "exception handling approach"
>
On Friday 04 of September 2009 22:08:02 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:04:46 +0200
> Rémi Cardona wrote:
> > Having tools to manipulate those variables is very misleading since
> > users will (rightfully) assume that we've done our homework and that
> > upstream did too.
> Why n
On Monday 21 of September 2009 17:38:53 Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> I think it is not required
> EXPF="src_compile src_test src_install" <- definition, also nulls anything
> what was in it before :]
> case ${EAPI:-0} in
> 2) EXPF="${EXPF} src_configure" ;;
> 1|0) ;;
> *) die "Un
In pre-EAPI-2, src_unpack phase was the most logical phase to be provided by
SCM eclasses, thus classes has been set up to export ${ECLASS}_src_unpack.
This phase in most (if not all) SCM eclasses provided:
- unpack functionality - fetch and store in ${DISTDIR}
- bootstrap functionality - either
On Thursday 24 of September 2009 08:32:53 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
It's all about making live <-> tagged ebuild synchronization easier.
Currently
> Not a good idea, IMHO. In pre-EAPI-2, the SCM eclasses shadow
> src_unpack of base.eclass, so also no autopatching of base.eclass
> takes place. If we n
On Saturday 10 of October 2009 22:50:37 Zac Medico wrote:
> Maybe a syntax extension for IUSE would be a little nicer. For example:
>
> IUSE="unstable? ( foo bar )"
No no no, the biggest reason for this is to not touch ebuild at all - it needs
to be fully ebuild independent.
It's like with re
On Wednesday 14 of October 2009 08:12:03 Eray Aslan wrote:
[...]
Please STOP already, all of you.
There is only one important fact nobody seems to comprehend - new openrc was
added to TESTING repository. That being said, if one uses packages from such
repository (portage subtree, whatever), on
On Tuesday 20 of October 2009 20:33:12 Alex Alexander wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> The KDE Team will have its usual monthly meeting this Thursday.
>
> Date: Thursday, 2009/10/22
> Time: 1900 UTC
> Channel: #gentoo-meetings
I'd like to suggest following agenda items:
1. Proposition to split desktop
On Wednesday 21 of October 2009 22:34:18 Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> 2009/10/21 Maciej Mrozowski :
> > 1. Proposition to split desktop profile to: KDE, Gnome, (and maybe some
> > others).
>
> How about making a desktop profile with everything common and being
> the parent
Hi there!
Resulting from discussion during last Gentoo KDE team meeting taking place 22
Oct 2009 at #gentoo-meetings (summary fill be available soon), having Gentoo
GNOME team representative, it's been decided to go ahead with splitting
desktop profile to DE-specific subprofiles, to avoid bloat
On Saturday 24 of October 2009 16:00:03 Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> Just so it is clear and there aren't any questions in the future. The
> XFCE team maintains a set of recommended global use flags in our docs[1]
> (maintained by Josh (nightmorph)). So, whatever direction this ends up,
> xfce will not b
On Monday 26 of October 2009 21:06:04 Rémi Cardona wrote:
> IMHO, we shouldn't even have desktop/server subprofiles to begin with.
> I've always considered Gentoo to be an "opt-in" distro where after a
> successful install, you end up with a bash prompt and a _means_ of
> installing new packages.
On Sunday 08 of November 2009 23:19:13 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > So, you didn't get my point. It must be true then, what they say about
> > geeks and social skills...
>
> i dont think your point is relevant to this thread
> -mike
Indeed it is - it's not about what's been said, but about the way
On Thursday 03 of December 2009 15:06:12 Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Le 03/12/2009 02:22, Jeremy Olexa a écrit :
> > Can parallel init script startup be made the default yet? I've been
> > running with it for months and never noticed a problem..
>
> I've been running it for more than a year on half a do
On Thursday 31 of December 2009 14:43:54 Mark Bateman wrote:
> Ben de Groot gentoo.org> writes:
> > As announced 5 months ago[1], Gentoo's Qt team now officially
> > deprecates usage of x11-libs/qt:3 and packages depending on this
> > version of Qt.
> >
> >
> > # Policy for remaining ebuilds dep
On Monday 11 of January 2010 01:25:45 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
wrote:
> 2010-01-10 21:56:01 Fabian Groffen napisał(a):
> > On 10-01-2010 09:29:28 +0100, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > > I would like to suggest introduction of support for PYTHON_DEPEND
> > > variable, whi
A as result of discussion http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-
d...@lists.gentoo.org/msg37300.html
ebeep and epause functions defined in eutils are not available in EAPI >= 3.
For interactive installs, PROPERTIES="interactive" should be used instead.
--
regards
MM
On Wednesday 17 of February 2010 03:25:16 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
If no objections, I'm going to commit in 5 days the following patch to
eutils.eclass
Index: eutils.eclass
===
RCS file: /var/cv
On Monday 01 of March 2010 22:24:56 Ben de Groot wrote:
> For some reason beyond my understanding, we have the cups useflag
> enabled by default in profiles. This has started to generate circular
> dependencies, at least for desktop profile users (gtk -> cups ->
> poppler -> gtk). I propose we no l
On Thursday 25 of February 2010 04:11:49 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 of February 2010 03:25:16 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
>
> If no objections, I'm going to commit in 5 days the following patch to
> eutils.eclass
>
&g
On Friday 05 of March 2010 11:22:18 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> I *am* a stable user, and I do want to install python3 (without having
> to override keywords -- because my packager, the gentoo python team,
> says it works!). I recognize the cruft problem, but I don't think
> keeping things in unstabl
On Monday 01 of March 2010 22:24:56 Ben de Groot wrote:
> For some reason beyond my understanding, we have the cups useflag
> enabled by default in profiles. This has started to generate circular
> dependencies, at least for desktop profile users (gtk -> cups ->
> poppler -> gtk). I propose we no l
On Saturday 06 of March 2010 18:05:20 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> > Would it be possible to make cups a PDEPEND in gtk+ or is it really
> > needed at compile time?
>
> cups is definitely needed at compile-time
>
> > The same for cups: can we ma
On Wednesday 10 of March 2010 07:52:28 Benedikt Böhm wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:30 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > There are quite a few bugs open for it plus the latest version (1.50.18)
> > is not even in Gentoo but on SourceForge only.
>
> The release on sourceforge is not co
On Friday 12 of March 2010 17:17:01 Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 12-03-2010 08:46:34 -0700, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> > That said they were perfectly entitled to make the decision of not
> > wanting to maintain qt3 any longer. The only advice I can give is that
> > all disgruntled users and developers
On Sunday 14 of March 2010 06:09:44 James Cloos wrote:
> > "BdG" == Ben de Groot writes:
> BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree.
>
> Nonsense. That attitude only servers to harm the user base.
>
> Leaving them in does not.
But leaving them broken and unmaintained in ma
On Saturday 27 of March 2010 21:58:41 William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 05:45:51PM +0100, Torsten Veller wrote:
> > * Petteri R?ty :
> > > So let's summarize for assigning to the single arch:
> > >
> > > In support (and my comments in support):
> > > - Can be used as a gentle reminde
On Sunday 28 of March 2010 09:39:18 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some
> > random php/perl library that's known to work.
> How do you know it works if you don't test on the arch in question?
The problem is not waiting for some to go
st
On Monday 29 of March 2010 09:30:38 Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Вск, 28/03/2010 в 07:47 +0200, Maciej Mrozowski пишет:
> > No, seriously - given the fact that some of my packages were even
> > stabilized without contacting me (app-misc/hal-cups-utils,
> > app-admin/system-c
Problem
..is known, let me summarize briefly.
Uninstalling packages providing libraries, without checking reverse runtime
dependencies of those packages leaves their dependencies unsatisfied (packages
with broken executables and/or shared libs).
Some package managers try their best not to remov
On Saturday 03 of April 2010 12:56:04 Fabian Groffen wrote:
> Is it known why this does happen exactly? When a lib is kept because it
> is still used, only its soname + what the soname points to should be
> kept. That would mean the lib can no longer be found during linking,
> unless you add some
On Saturday 03 of April 2010 14:16:14 Fabian Groffen wrote:
> Shouldn't we fix that buildsystem then? Do you have an example of a
> package/buildsystem that does that?
"We" already do, the thing is that maybe we don't have to.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=240323
From top of my head: pyt
1 - 100 of 165 matches
Mail list logo
