On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 19:56:01 -0400
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> huh ? i think you're thinking of per-package use.mask, not
> per-package use defaults
Oh yeah good call.
--
Jason Wever
Gentoo/Sparc Team Co-Lead
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 21:39:46 -0700 Peter Gordon
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | If they were so "extremely important" then they would not be optional,
> | and hence not even be USE flags at all, no? Or am I missing something?
>
> You're missing something. Vim used to have
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:55:39 +0200 Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| some packages print out important notices on install/update.
| I'd like to see those notes before actually updating, so when
| using --pretend.
I think you should spend some time learning what Gentoo is, how to use
it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Raphael Marichez wrote:
>
>> app-doc/chmlib is without an active ebuild maintainer and has an open
security
>> bug [1]
>>
>> Anyone willing to take care of this package in the future, please update
>> metadata.xml and CC yourself on
Raphael Marichez wrote:
> app-doc/chmlib is without an active ebuild maintainer and has an open
> security
> bug [1]
>
> Anyone willing to take care of this package in the future, please update
> metadata.xml and CC yourself on the bug.
>
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143181
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 05:49:40PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 15:18, Zac Medico wrote:
> > Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > > Any chance of per-package USE defaults support? That's much more useful
> > > to me.
> >
> > Attached to bug 61732 there's a patch that implements th
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 19:46, Jason Wever wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:57:44 +0100
> "Stuart Herbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As a package maintainer, I'm happy :) Is this going to cause problems
> > for arch teams at all?
>
> I hope not. I've been looking forward to this for arch spe
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:57:44 +0100
"Stuart Herbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As a package maintainer, I'm happy :) Is this going to cause problems
> for arch teams at all?
I hope not. I've been looking forward to this for arch specific
reasons (like if package foo fails to build with the per
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:22:42 -0700 Donnie Berkholz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| So the best fix for this is not just retaining two ways to say the
| same thing but actually expanding it? (!foo vs nofoo). That feels
| really wrong.
The Vim / ncurses example I posted earlier is perhaps a more practi
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Uh, no it wouldn't. Part of the reason we have no* flags is to avoid
> dep problems. Consider:
>
> USE="!foo? ( some_unavailable_on_x86_package )"
>
> versus:
>
> USE="nofoo? ( some_unavailable_on_x86_package )"
>
> The nofoo flag can be use masked. The foo flag can't.
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:56:24 -0700 Donnie Berkholz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Jason Wever wrote:
| > This could allow for us to get rid of the nofoo use flag
| > nomenclature that folks have been doing for functionality that is
| > highly suggested to be on by default.
|
| So would just adding i
Jason Wever wrote:
> This could allow for us to get rid of the nofoo use flag nomenclature
> that folks have been doing for functionality that is highly suggested to
> be on by default.
So would just adding it to make.defaults ... people using -* deserve
what they get, if they don't pay attention.
Stuart Herbert wrote:
> Hi Zac,
>
> On 8/8/06, Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Stuart Herbert wrote:
>> > Any chance of per-package USE defaults support? That's much more
>> useful
>> > to me.
>>
>> Attached to bug 61732 there's a pa
Hi Zac,
On 8/8/06, Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stuart Herbert wrote:
> Any chance of per-package USE defaults support? That's much more useful
> to me.
Attached to bug 61732 there's a patch that implements this via a new
IUSE_DEFAULTS e
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> some packages print out important notices on install/update.
> I'd like to see those notes before actually updating, so when
> using --pretend.
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0042.html
> cu
better not.
--
Best regards,
Jakub Moc
mailto:[
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 15:18, Zac Medico wrote:
> Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > Any chance of per-package USE defaults support? That's much more useful
> > to me.
>
> Attached to bug 61732 there's a patch that implements this via a new
> IUSE_DEFAULTS ebuild variable. If people like that particula
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 16:28, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> hmm, what do you do if there's a need for arch specific defaults ?
not accounted for as we really havent found this to be a big deal
> IMHO its better to have these defaults somewhere within the profile.
> Maybe another package.use alike fi
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
>
>
>>> And what does this flag exactly say at this point ?
>>>
>>> Install only xlib ?
>>> Install xlib and some further ones ? Which ones ?
>>> Install all libs ?
>> Opening an ebuild and reading it must be hard.
>
> No
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> I'm interested in arguments whether patches should sit directly
> within the portage tree or downloaded when needed.
>
> My feeling: downloading on demand is better.
>
> + makes the tree smaller, saves space, saves network traffic
> - downloading lots of
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 12:19:31AM +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> I'm a coward... or just find estonian language in computer terminology a
> bit weird to read.
I'd find it weird too :)
>
> And my family name is Raudsepp, not Raudseep, where "seep" in the typo
> means soap in estonian. Bad bad Bryan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: MD5
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
>
>
>>> And what does this flag exactly say at this point ?
>>>
>>> Install only xlib ?
>>> Install xlib and some further ones ? Which ones ?
>>> Install all libs ?
>> Opening
Hi folks,
I'm interested in arguments whether patches should sit directly
within the portage tree or downloaded when needed.
My feeling: downloading on demand is better.
+ makes the tree smaller, saves space, saves network traffic
- downloading lots of patches may take a little bit
What do y
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> some packages print out important notices on install/update.
> I'd like to see those notes before actually updating, so when
> using --pretend.
>
> I'd like to see this as an feature. We could put those texts into
> some ebui
On 8/8/06, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think, modularized Xorg, as we have today, is far much better
than the old monolithic thing.
I think you are failing to realize that this isn't something that
Gentoo did on it's own. Upstream went to separate packages, and
Gentoo followed.
* Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Attached to bug 61732 there's a patch that implements this via
> a new IUSE_DEFAULTS ebuild variable.
hmm, what do you do if there's a need for arch specific defaults ?
IMHO its better to have these defaults somewhere within the profile.
Maybe anoth
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> some packages print out important notices on install/update.
> I'd like to see those notes before actually updating, so when
> using --pretend.
>
> I'd like to see this as an feature. We could put those texts int
Hi folks,
some packages print out important notices on install/update.
I'd like to see those notes before actually updating, so when
using --pretend.
I'd like to see this as an feature. We could put those texts into
some ebuild variable or an separate file, so emerge can show it
on emerge.
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 21:22 +0100, Luis Medinas wrote:
> Wow nice addiction to our team.
I am pondering which addiction do you mean here :/
> Congrats Mart and keep up with good work.
Thanks!
--
Mart Raudsepp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>> Opening an ebuild and reading it must be hard.
>
> Not what I asked. I'm talking about what an user can expect to get.
> You don't expect every user to look trough each ebuilt, seriously ?
>
> And, in case of Xorg, the individual needs may very deeply.
> Some applications
> Please welcome Mart to the team.
Very much so - welcome Mart, enjoy the show!
Wolf
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
* Thomas Cort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> $ grep minimal /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc
> minimal - Install a very minimal build (disables, for example, plugins,
> fonts, most drivers, non-critical features)
Very vague.
The user has to take a deep look into the ebuilt and the binary
package
* Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > And what does this flag exactly say at this point ?
> >
> > Install only xlib ?
> > Install xlib and some further ones ? Which ones ?
> > Install all libs ?
>
> Opening an ebuild and reading it must be hard.
Not what I asked. I'm talking abo
Hi all.
Mart hails from Estonia and recently joined the Gentoo team to take care
of all the wx* stuff. Mart is also working on wx* stuff upstream so all
this stuff should be in very good hands now :)
Besides traditional "Estonian stuff" (wikipedia talks about Polka,
movies like "All my Lenins" an
Joshua Nichols wrote:
While it is columnar, the D is in a dark blue font. If you happen to be
using a dark background, there is extremely little contrast. Perhaps it
could be a different color that would stick out in both light and dark
backgrounds?
There is color-mapping support in portage 2.1
Patrick McLean wrote:
> Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> [ebuild R ] sys-fs/cryptsetup-luks-1.0.3-r2
> [ebuild U ] x11-terms/rxvt-unicode-7.9 [7.8-r1]
> [ebuild U ] sci-chemistry/gromacs-3.3.1 [3.3]
> [ebuild UD] app-foo/bar-1.0.2 [1.1.0]
> [ebuild U ] app-text/evince-0.5.5 [0.5.4]
>
> W
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 00:22:50 -0700,
Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> forcing cxx on via package.mask for gcc
> sys-devel/gcc[-cxx]
If i want to build a cxx-free system, am i supposed to add
"sys-devel/gcc[-cxx]" to its package.unmask? If so, what will prevent
Portage upgrading to some p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stuart Herbert wrote:
> Any chance of per-package USE defaults support? That's much more useful
> to me.
Attached to bug 61732 there's a patch that implements this via a new
IUSE_DEFAULTS ebuild variable. If people like that particular implementati
On 8/7/06, Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What sort of problems? An example backing up your claims would be very nice.
While I don't agree with Enrico that splitting up slotted packages is
the right thing to do, there are some corner cases involving slots
that portage (more specific
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Would everybody please stop responding to this obvious troll? I admit
its very amusing reading about his clear lack of understanding, but
don't we have better things to do?
Colin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 8/8/06, Jason Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This could allow for us to get rid of the nofoo use flag nomenclature that
folks have been doing for functionality that is highly suggested to be on
by default.
Which would be fantastic IMO.
-Richard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Peter Gordon wrote:
Zac Medico wrote:
The difference with use.force is that it prevents flags, that are deemed
extremely important, from being accidentally disabled by the user.
If they were so "extremely important" then they
Brian Harring wrote:
Question your method of bootstraping then- note that for gcc it's
nocxx, not cxx.
Meaning, USE=nocxx _disables_ building cxx; this is why default IUSE
is requested, to kill off the 'no' (and it's seperate from my point)-
c++ related failures there would be due to either
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:57:55 -0700 Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| It does seem appealing to unify the package.use.mask and
| package.use.force functionality into a single file that acts like
| package.mask with use-deps support. If we do it this way, devs won't
| be able to start using pa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Harring wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 08:33:51AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 00:22:50 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> | On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:31AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> | > On Mon
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> How can I get an patch downloaded from some location and then applied ?
> I've inspecting some ebuilds in the portage tree and learned how to
> apply patches in the files/ subdir. Now I need to know, how to download
> the patches (simply add them to $SRC_URI ?) and then get
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 10:41, Patrick McLean wrote:
> We generally assume that our users have some intelligence, we don't put
> big fat warnings on everything that might break. We give the users all
> the information and let them decide if its going to break. Gentoo never
> was and never will be
Hello,
The Adopt a Developer[1] project hasn't gotten any requests[2] from
developers needing hardware or shell accounts or books or anything
else, so I'm just writing a little note to encourage any developer (who
has been a developer for at least 6 months) who could use extra stuff
to improve Gen
looks like your mail server ate this ...
someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure directory tree
rooted in /emul
if we moved these things to the standard lib32 dirs, it would certainly ease
the pain of people doing multilib building, both in and out of portage
it'd also
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:50:18 +0200
Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Jan Kundrat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > > For example: I've got several headless server systems where I now
> > > have to run some X applications. I only need xlib (an
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Jan Kundrat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>>> For example: I've got several headless server systems where I now
>>> have to run some X applications. I only need xlib (and its deps)
>>> on this system, not the whole X distribution
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 16:46:08 +0200
Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can I get an patch downloaded from some location and then applied ?
> I've inspecting some ebuilds in the portage tree and learned how to
> apply patches in the files/ subdir. Now I need to know, how to download
> th
* Jan Kundrat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > For example: I've got several headless server systems where I now
> > have to run some X applications. I only need xlib (and its deps)
> > on this system, not the whole X distribution. In a monolithic
> > wo
* Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> To do that, you have to seperate any libs used between the two.
> In such a pkg, there *should* be a common lib- so you're suggesting
If there's any (noticable amount of) common code, yes of course.
> Yet *more* manual work.
Not for the gen
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> So I'll probably have no other chance than writing a frontend
> to emerge, parsing its output - hoping the output syntax remains
> the same for an sufficiant time :(
>
[ebuild R ] sys-fs/cryptsetup-luks-1.0.3-r2
[ebuild U ] x11-terms/rxvt-unicode-7.9 [7.8-r1]
[ebu
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> For example: I've got several headless server systems where I now
> have to run some X applications. I only need xlib (and its deps)
> on this system, not the whole X distribution. In a monolithic
> world, I would have to install *everything*, from serve
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 21:05 +1000, Daniel Black wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 21:00, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> > The name is Andrew, Andrew Ross. He takes it shaken, not stirred.
> > Studies Computer Science, admins Gentoo servers for a living (how sick
> > of this will he get?),
>
> Almos
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
But it's very unclear. Ask around in the user list, who knows what
"minimal" in this special case means (without extra reading the
documentation). Such useflags should be obvious, but "minimal" isnt.
"without extra reading the documentation"? Documentation is there to be
* Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >foo/bar gui=gtk
> >blah/blubb gui=qt2
>
> bleh/enrico gui=qt4
s/qt4/ncurses/;
;-P
cu
--
-
Enrico Weigelt== metux IT service - ht
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 12:55:28PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > On Tuesday 08 August 2006 09:56, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > > If you want an dhcp client, install "dhcp-client", if you
> > > want an dhcp server, install "dhcp-server". Could it be simpl
Pardon the spam, but correcting a misstatement on my part-
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 09:41:39PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
> I know of selinux, and multilib- all that are effectively features,
> and exist in the use conditional namespace because they
> unfortunately straddle both (same issue with
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Maybe there could be an extra file, ie. package.use.alias
>
> foo/bar gui=gtk
> blah/blubbgui=qt2
> ...
>
> I'm not sure if this alias handling should be done by emerge,
> or better by some frontend (I learned that explicit downgrade
> warnings should b
* Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 09:56, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > If you want an dhcp client, install "dhcp-client", if you
> > want an dhcp server, install "dhcp-server". Could it be simpler ?
>
> Maybe you missed the part of the discussion where we thought t
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 21:00, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> The name is Andrew, Andrew Ross. He takes it shaken, not stirred.
> Studies Computer Science, admins Gentoo servers for a living (how sick
> of this will he get?),
Almost overdosed last week. Making a steady recovery and learning to pac
On Monday 07 August 2006 23:45, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> It is my pleasure to introduce to you... the artist formerly known as...
> beu! Many will know Elfyn from his previous stint as a Gentoo developer.
> This time around, we have a understanding.. the sort that involves
> sleeping with fish
* Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> W.Kenworthy wrote:
> >My personal opinion is that whilst things like modular X are good for
> >developers, they are not so good for users - particularly gentoo users.
>
> Definitely not true. The X.Org 7.1 release shared the vast majority of
> pack
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
foo/bar gui=gtk
blah/blubb gui=qt2
bleh/enrico gui=qt4
SCNR
--
Kind Regards,
Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
* Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> On Monday 07 August 2006 21:44, W.Kenworthy wrote:
> > My personal opinion is that whilst things like modular X are good for
> > developers, they are not so good for users - particularly gentoo users.
>
> we provide meta packages (X/kde/gnome/etc...)
* Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > I just want to keep things simple. We're talking about introducing
> > new (additional) logic. This has to be maintained. And it doesn't
> > actually *solve* the problem which is this discussion was started.
>
> Removing the stuff from the ebuil
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 11:11:59AM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 August 2006 09:56, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > If you want an dhcp client, install "dhcp-client", if you
> > want an dhcp server, install "dhcp-server". Could it be simpler ?
>
> Maybe you missed the part of the discussion
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 09:56, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> If you want an dhcp client, install "dhcp-client", if you
> want an dhcp server, install "dhcp-server". Could it be simpler ?
Maybe you missed the part of the discussion where we thought that maintaing 3
ebuilds vs 1 ebuild was a bad idea.
Am Dienstag, 8. August 2006 13:00 schrieb Christel Dahlskjaer:
> Well, well.. who was I to complain when Gentoo had to fly me to
> Melbourne, Australia to check out our newest recruit. Like a scene
> out of Home and Away (ok, it's the only Australian TV show I know) we
> swam with dolphins, we ran
Well, well.. who was I to complain when Gentoo had to fly me to
Melbourne, Australia to check out our newest recruit. Like a scene out
of Home and Away (ok, it's the only Australian TV show I know) we swam
with dolphins, we ran along the beach.. *snap* Ok, so Gentoo didn't fly
me to Oz, not that I
Hi,
app-doc/chmlib is without an active ebuild maintainer and has an open security
bug [1]
Anyone willing to take care of this package in the future, please update
metadata.xml and CC yourself on the bug.
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=143181
cheers
--
Raphael Marichez aka Falc
Peter Gordon wrote:
Zac Medico wrote:
The difference with use.force is that it prevents flags, that are deemed
extremely important, from being accidentally disabled by the user.
If they were so "extremely important" then they would not be optional,
and hence not even be USE flags at all, no? O
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 08:33:51AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 00:22:50 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:31AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:41:39 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | > wrote:
Hi Zac,
On 8/8/06, Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everyone,
I've written a patch [1] that implements support for use.force and package.use.force as originally
described by Sven Wegener [2] over a year ago. Basically, this feature is the
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 00:22:50 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:31AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:41:39 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > wrote:
| > | > The use.force feature is complementary to use.mask. It's
| > | >
On 8/7/06, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Okay, you simply don't want to talk or even think about this issue.
You have had lots of help from many different Gentoo developers and
users on your recent issues. All of these people are volunteers, and
have given their time and experti
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:31AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 21:41:39 -0700 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | > The use.force feature is complementary to use.mask. It's exactly
> | > the same concept, but inverted.
> |
> | And both files _should_ be implemen
79 matches
Mail list logo
