Hi,
Don't use debug.eclass.
A team of crackpot developers gangbanged the tree (hi beu!) and remove
all the nasty inherit lines, and then Diego added a deprecation message
in the eclass.
People with overlays utilizing debug.eclass will get many annoying
messages prompting them to stop inheriting
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 04 January 2007 20:33, Gustavo Felisberto wrote:
>> Ok, so what is diference?
>
> probably the samething as between -k and -K
> -mike
A more verbose answer:
-k says "use binary packages if possible, otherwise use ebuilds"
-K says "use only binary packages, fai
>From Bug #159329
"abeni was pmasked by pythonhead in April 2005, waiting on a version
that supported wxpython-2.6. no release was ever made, and upstream
(pythonhead) is MIA. we're starting to phase out wxpython-2.4 support
now, so these ebuilds should be removed (too bad, looks like a cool
proje
Going into maintenance mode until 2007.1.8, only bugs introduced by
latest changes will be fixed.
Pondering a general revision bump of dev/db/mysql* tomorrow to fix/show
breakage.
cheers
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Thursday 04 January 2007 20:33, Gustavo Felisberto wrote:
> Ok, so what is diference?
probably the samething as between -k and -K
-mike
pgp1GupdWafBk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
According to man portage:
--getbinpkg (-g)
Using the server and location defined in PORTAGE_BINHOST
(see make.conf(5)), portage will download the
information from each binary package found and it will use that
information to help build the dependency
Robert Buchholz wrote:
> I don't want to sound negative and I like the idea a lot, but two things
> are on my mind about this:
>
> It should also sync with changes in the tree, like package removals,
> additions and package moves.
For sure.
> When you're talking about it on ebuild base: When a
The day has finally come, and we're ready to do the final migration of
Bugzilla to the new hardware.
This is tentatively scheduled to start at 02h00 UTC on 6th January 2007.
I am estimating 3 hours for all of it, but I hope to have it done is
less than that.
Keep an eye on the #gentoo-dev topic f
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Los Angeles, CA
January 2, 2007
The Southern California Linux Expo announces plans to a 'Women In Open Source'
Mini-conference. The goals of the conference are to encourage women to use
technology and open source and free software, and to explore the obstacles
that women f
On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 12:00:51 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Except that a GPL-RENEW tag would be transparent over newer GPL
| releases too.
But it won't be transparent for end users, who will have to accept
weird non-licences in ACCEPT_LICENCES.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail
On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 12:00:51 +0100
Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 04 January 2007 11:42, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:18:51 +0100
> >
> > Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I know that I'm a bit late on this, but to me the "version 2 or
> > >
Steve Long schrieb:
>>> In terms of maintaining the metadata, am I right in thinking it's all
>>> just kept within the text files in the tree?
>> Since the tree itself is the best database of the packages available,
>> anything else would be a lot more overhead.
>>
> I really don't agree, altho I c
On Thursday 04 January 2007 11:42, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:18:51 +0100
>
> Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I know that I'm a bit late on this, but to me the "version 2 or
> > later" is a license by itself. Let's call it GPL-RENEW and let the
> > file have content
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Steve Long wrote:
>> Robert Buchholz wrote:
>>> Since the tree itself is the best database of the packages available,
>>> anything else would be a lot more overhead.
>
>> I really don't agree, altho I could well be missing something. Surely there
>> should be a maintenance/QA da
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 10:18:51 +0100
Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know that I'm a bit late on this, but to me the "version 2 or
> later" is a license by itself. Let's call it GPL-RENEW and let the
> file have contents like:
> "This package is licensed with the version x or later clau
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 22:54, Steve Long wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > I know that I'm a bit late on this, but to me the "version 2 or later" is
> > a license by itself. Let's call it GPL-RENEW and let the file have
> > contents like:
> > "This package is licensed with the version x or l
16 matches
Mail list logo
