Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> that means when people upgrade to gcc-3.4, gcc-3.3 will remain on their
> system until they remove it
>
> so if user fails to rebuild all their packages before unmerging gcc-3.3
> they will be screwed, but OH WELL
Yea. Even after they remove it though,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 05:24:52PM -0500, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:12 +0100, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote:
> > Does this mean that we can get rid of the libstd++ dependency of gcc,
> > and move it to the binary packages that depends on gcc 3.3 .
> > I know this has been d
On 11/28/05, Spider (D.m.D. Lj.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:56 -0800, Bret Towe wrote:
>
> > >
> > > So, now I'm just asking for comments and/or discussion here.. would it
> > > be worth the time spent on this?
> > > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-10/msg00436.htm
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:56 -0800, Bret Towe wrote:
> >
> > So, now I'm just asking for comments and/or discussion here.. would it
> > be worth the time spent on this?
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-10/msg00436.html
>
> looks interesting personally id like to see how it acts on kde a
On 11/28/05, Spider (D.m.D. Lj.) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> I've been looking some at Michael Meeks -Bdirect patches, and the
> possible performance boost they could give.
>
> The good parts here is that it seems to be far less intrusive for the
> running system than prelink is, on the
Hello,
I've been looking some at Michael Meeks -Bdirect patches, and the
possible performance boost they could give.
The good parts here is that it seems to be far less intrusive for the
running system than prelink is, on the other hand, it does require a
more intrusive surgery into the core sy
Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:12 +0100, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote:
>
>> Does this mean that we can get rid of the libstd++ dependency of gcc,
>> and move it to the binary packages that depends on gcc 3.3 .
>> I know this has been discussed before, but once it's stable I se
"Tom Martin"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
... and he
participated in the Google Summer of Code in writing a generational
garbage collector, GMC, for the Perl 6 VM (http://www.parrotcode.org).
>
Sweet! Does this mean he can help us get parrot/pugs functional again in
portage? :)
(sorry for
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 19:12 +0100, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote:
>
> Does this mean that we can get rid of the libstd++ dependency of gcc,
> and move it to the binary packages that depends on gcc 3.3 .
> I know this has been discussed before, but once it's stable I see no
> reason to keep the dep
On Monday 28 of November 2005 21:01 Curtis Napier wrote:
> I agree with this. I often don't feel like wading through 5 pages of bad
> results on google to find an obscure packages homepage. I look in the
> ebuild for this information all the time. A seperate tag like , as
> someone mentioned earlie
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 21:53 +0100, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
> Hi!
>
> If nobody objects I will add DVB_CARDS to USE_EXAPAND on next saturday
> (2005/12/03).
>
> This will be used to decide which firmware-file to download and install
> within
> the to be created media-tv/linuxtv-dvb-firmware
Hi!
If nobody objects I will add DVB_CARDS to USE_EXAPAND on next saturday
(2005/12/03).
This will be used to decide which firmware-file to download and install within
the to be created media-tv/linuxtv-dvb-firmware ebuild.
Zzam
--
Matthias Schwarzott
Gentoo Developer
http://www.gentoo.org
-
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Monday 28 November 2005 16:47, Jan Kundrát wrote:
What about setting the HOMEPAGE of alsa-something to point to our
ALSA-guide?
Because that's not the homepage?
I go often on pgo to see the homepage of something, and it's usually to get
*upstream* homepage
Hi list,
Nattfodd's joining to help with the text-markup herd. His real name is
Alexandre Buisse and he lives in Lyons, France, where he is studying
for computer science in the Ècole Normale Superieure de Lyon. He's
aiming to achieve either a Ph.D. in logic, although he's also
considering model th
On 28-11-2005 18:54:14 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:46:57 +0100 Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
> | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | > | A
Patrick Lauer wrote: [Mon Nov 28 2005, 12:46:57PM CST]
> > Also, why not bring back the "post to -core" requirement? Make it a
> > rule that it can't be labelled as an official Gentoo publication unless
> > it gets some review...
Heh. Personally, I've never really been all that fond of the GWN be
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:46:57 +0100
Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not bring back the "the GWN is a community thing and YOU can also
> contribute!!!" mentality?
Release early, release often?
JeR
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
| I suggest that in the future, all developers who are directly quoted
| in the GWN are contacted prior to posting the quotes. I realize that
| this will put a bit more work load on the GWN authors, but it should
| be as simple as sending a mail with the relevant section quoted for
| the developer
Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>Also, why not bring back the "post to -core" requirement? Make it a
>>rule that it can't be labelled as an official Gentoo publication unless
>>it gets some review...
>
> Why not bring back the "the GWN is a community thing and YOU can also
> contribute!!!" mentality?
>
>
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:46:57 +0100 Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | A friend of mine just alerted me to the fact, that I am featured
|
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | A friend of mine just alerted me to the fact, that I am featured in
> | this weeks Gentoo Weekly News. Odd, I thought, noone had asked me
> | anything
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does this mean that we can get rid of the libstd++ dependency of gcc,
and move it to the binary packages that depends on gcc 3.3 .
I know this has been discussed before, but once it's stable I see no
reason to keep the dependency in the gcc ebuild, whe
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| A friend of mine just alerted me to the fact, that I am featured in
| this weeks Gentoo Weekly News. Odd, I thought, noone had asked me
| anything regarding the GWN...
Not the first time this has happened...
| I
On Monday 28 November 2005 16:47, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> What about setting the HOMEPAGE of alsa-something to point to our
> ALSA-guide?
Because that's not the homepage?
I go often on pgo to see the homepage of something, and it's usually to get
*upstream* homepage, not Gentoo's guides.
It's mislead
On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 17:48 +0100, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 05:12:45PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > As I said earlier, we'd like to get rid of the nasty auto-use feature,
> > including the support for the USE_ORDER variable. Right now we intend
> > this for 2.0.54 (
On Monday 28 of November 2005 11:55 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> I like this idea, as it would also allow to specify user documentation that
> can be found on GDP, allowing users to find out the link to alsa guide
> directly from an alsa-* package's metadata.
What about setting the HOMEPAGE
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 09:22:33AM -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
> Only thing I see
> as lacking is we might want to get a doc together on how to properly upgrade
> your toolchain so we don't get an influx of bugs from users that have a
> system half compiled with 3.3 and the other half with 3.4 so the
This is basically a heads-up email to everyone to say that we are probably
going to be moving gcc-3.4.4-r1 to stable on x86 very soon. If any of the
archs that have already done the move from having 3.3 stable to 3.4 could
give us a heads up on what to expect, that would be great. Only thing I se
On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 12:46:47PM +0100, George Shapovalov wrote:
> On Monday, 28. November 2005 12.30, Simon Stelling wrote:
> > Is there a good reason for sending this to -dev?
> Because he wanted to let users know of corrections? At least the ones who
> care.
Exactly.
Regards,
Brix
--
Henr
On Monday, 28. November 2005 12.30, Simon Stelling wrote:
> Is there a good reason for sending this to -dev?
Because he wanted to let users know of corrections? At least the ones who
care.
As for the original issue, isn't this the policy and how it has always been in
fact? Back in earlier days
Is there a good reason for sending this to -dev? You basically complain
about the way the GWN authors handled the issue, so why do you tell it
all the devs? It seems a bit like a lame attempt to blame them in public
for their faults.
Other than that, I agree with you.
--
Simon Stelling
Gentoo
On Monday 28 November 2005 12:20, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> Perhaps we should do both, as "title" attributes are not easy for machines
> to understand, as they are freeform. The kind attribute would not be and
> only allow certain values such as: "maintainer", "user",
> "administration", "troubleshoo
On Monday 28 November 2005 11:55, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Monday 28 November 2005 11:39, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > In any way I like the idea to add a tag to the metadata.xml files. I
> > would however want to do it differently. I'd like to propose a
> > general tag with the usual at
On Sunday 27 November 2005 16:30, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> Could this debug info be NFS shared? assuming like computers, or would
> it be different on each computer.
It is probably as shareable as normal library files are. Maybe there is
more in common, but if the source was different, the end result
On Sunday 27 November 2005 22:01, Ivan Yosifov wrote:
>
> What is this debugedit thing for us non-devs ? IMO portage should have
> some way to keep the sources around for debugging, for the patch you
> are proposing to be fully useful.
It allows some hacks on the debug info. For example the debug
On Monday 28 November 2005 11:39, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> In any way I like the idea to add a tag to the metadata.xml files. I would
> however want to do it differently. I'd like to propose a general
> tag with the usual attributes (version/deprange, language) and as new
> attributes a "src" and a
On Saturday 26 November 2005 18:50, Ned Ludd wrote:
> Good afternoon,
>
> probably in portage-2.0.54 a patch will be added to emit split debug
> info. Having a split debug allows us to retain all the advantages of
> stripping executables while gaining the ability to properly debug
> executables in
On Sunday 27 November 2005 18:43, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 24 November 2005 12:31, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> > What I'm waiting for now are comments if someone has ideas where to
> > put guides that does not belong directly to an existant project. And
> > if someone w
, all developers who are directly quoted
in the GWN are contacted prior to posting the quotes. I realize that
this will put a bit more work load on the GWN authors, but it should
be as simple as sending a mail with the relevant section quoted for
the developer to accept.
Regards,
Brix
[1]: htt
Hi,
This is an automatically created email message.
http://gentoo.tamperd.net/stable has just been updated with 14890 ebuilds.
The page shows results from a number of tests that are run against the ebuilds.
The tests are:
* if a version has been masked for 30 days or more.
* if an arch was in KE
40 matches
Mail list logo
