On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 09:10:37 +0100
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 03:23:42 +
> Saleem Abdulrasool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Description:
> >GNOME 1.x is no longer supported by upstream GNOME developers.
> >Maintaining GNOME 1.x adds unnecessary comp
On 2006-11-10 at 12:24 +0500, Anatoly Shipitsin wrote:
> It's app-admin/sudo and sys-process/fcron.
> This packages use virtual/editor but by default set nano as default
> editor.
> I'm don't know how get provider category virtual/editor. But equery
> view it as first package.
> Any ideas ?
Pl
On Friday 10 November 2006 02:24, Anatoly Shipitsin wrote:
> When i'm found two packets need this issue.
why do you care who is providing the virtual ? the entire point of virtual's
is that the provider does not matter
-mike
pgpDqYouyyrpJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hello. When i'm found two packets need this issue. It's app-admin/sudo and sys-process/fcron. This packages use virtual/editor but by default set nano as default editor. I'm don't know how get provider category virtual/editor. But equery view it as first package.
Any ideas ?
Hi all,
# Sorry for being inactive for a while, I lost my development box due to
# HDD crash several months ago ;(
At Thu, 9 Nov 2006 09:10:37 +0100,
Marius Mauch wrote:
> Could you provide the script that generated those lists (or was it done
> manually)? I'm not so sure that it is accurate, a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi:
My name is Hector I am a CS student in third year. I have a interest
in programming languages specially in functional programming, I have
been using scheme for some time so I will like to help with the
mantainance of the ebuilds. Any pointers to
This package is unmaintaiend in Gentoo, unported to modular X, available only
on x86, and masked for the security bug #115760 since last January.
Unless anyone has a reason to leave it there, I'd punt it next month (if I
remember of it of course).
Alternatives: mplayer, xine, vlc, whatever-you-
This package will be removed in a month, because:
- the ebuild has some serious sandbox problems
- the package is broken and has open bugs (93316 and 154320)
- upstream has open bugs and
- there was no update after 2002
- there are actively maintained alternatives (pgpool, pgpool2)
signature.
On 11/9/06, Bryan Østergaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all, here's the complete log from the Council Meeting + a short
summary.
Summary:
All council members was present (Andrew Gaffney (agaffney) proxied for
Chris Gianello (wolf31o2)).
Agenda was:
1. Reply-to-list
2. SPF
3. QA update / plan
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 10:32:43PM +0100, Bryan Østergaard wrote:
> Hi all, here's the complete log from the Council Meeting + a short
> summary.
>
Of course I had to screw up the subject.. It's of course the nov. 9
meeting.
Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Steve Dibb wrote:
> I've gone through some of them and here are the ones I suggest get
> moved to global, since the use flag description / functionality is
> the same or similar enough to mean "support for $x":
What about 'libnotify'?
As far as I can see all 11 entries in use.local.desc amount to
Hi all, here's the complete log from the Council Meeting + a short
summary.
Summary:
All council members was present (Andrew Gaffney (agaffney) proxied for
Chris Gianello (wolf31o2)).
Agenda was:
1. Reply-to-list
2. SPF
3. QA update / plans
4. Bugzilla status
1. Council decided that there were n
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 14:11:32 -0700 Steve Dibb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Any objections to moving any of those over, please let me know.
udev and logrotate have been discussed on this list previously. Don't
change them without reading the earlier discussions.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail
With my new little database, I ran a query to get the count of local use flags
that are being used, to see which ones can be candidates for moving to a global
USE flag instead. Here's the query results:
http://wonkabar.org/~steve/gentoo/use_local_count.txt
I've gone through some of them and h
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 22:48 -0500, Alec Warner wrote:
> Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> > Saleem & Gnome Team,
> >
> > I think it's high time this was done. My suggestion would be to
> > publicise this *beyond* just the gentoo-dev list. I would put this on
> > -user and in the forums (and one of you sh
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 17:37 +, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 07:19:44PM +0200 or thereabouts, Alin Nastac wrote:
> > I say we should have +all (SPF-capable MTAs will consider any IP address
> > as authorized to send mail on behalf of g.o - equivalent with "Message
> > source OK")
On 08/11/06, Tobias Klausmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
Mr windmill man! ^_^
PPS: Windmills, anyone?
Yes, I'll take two, please. --beu
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Kurt Lieber wrote: [Wed Nov 08 2006, 12:02:04PM EST]
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 10:25:47AM -0500 or thereabouts, Aron Griffis wrote:
> > Gentoo.org has elected to provide the SPF records, effectively marking
> > gentoo.org mail originating from other SMTP servers as rogue.
>
> That simply is not
Steve Dibb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 9 listopada 2006 06:20 napisał:
> Okay, doing some QA work with my new scripts, found a few ebuilds with local
> USE
> flags that do not have an entry in use.local.desc. Bad, bad!
>
> For some of the missing use flags (net, avahi, libnotify), I recommend moving
>
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 03:23:19AM +, Saleem Abdulrasool wrote:
> Please do NOT reply to this message with a reason why package X should not be
> masked. If you feel strongly about a package, please port it to GTK+-2 and
> submit patches on a new bug.
>
> x11-wm/sawfish
This should say
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 November 2006 22:47, Steve Long wrote:
>> I understand the ABI changes at major compiler upgrades, especially for
>> C++. Is this such a problem for C?
>
> i think you misread his e-mail
>
> regardless, stable ABIs guarantee forward compatibility, not backwa
On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 03:23:42 +
Saleem Abdulrasool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Description:
>GNOME 1.x is no longer supported by upstream GNOME developers.
>Maintaining GNOME 1.x adds unnecessary complexity to the Gentoo GNOME
>developers' workload. Some of the contributing factors
22 matches
Mail list logo
