On Thursday 10 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> gcc-4.3 seems to be standing up well. since the major gcc-ebuild-specific
> issues seem to be resolved now, i'll probably do a sweep of bugs to see if
> there's any patches i'm missing (if you guys know of a bug that should be
> addressed specific
On Monday 21 April 2008, Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:01 PM, Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > # Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Apr 2008)
> > # Masked for removal in 30 days. Doesn't build
> > # wrt bug 178036 and has open CVE-2007-4773 wrt
> > # sec
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:01 PM, Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Apr 2008)
> # Masked for removal in 30 days. Doesn't build
> # wrt bug 178036 and has open CVE-2007-4773 wrt
> # security bug 203195.
> sys-apps/systrace
> --
> gentoo-dev@l
+# Markus Ullmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Apr 2008)
+# Masked for removal in 30 days.
+# unmaintained, broken and not used anywhere
+# use dev-python/fuse-python instead
+sys-fs/python-fuse
-Jokey
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
# Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Apr 2008)
# Masked for removal in 30 days. Doesn't build
# wrt bug 178036 and has open CVE-2007-4773 wrt
# security bug 203195.
sys-apps/systrace
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
# Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Apr 2008)
# Masked by treecleaners for bug 160267. Removed in ~60 days.
# Has been included in 2.6 kernel series.
net-fs/coda-kernel
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 19:11 +0100, Peter Weller wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-04-20 at 19:36 +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > Le dimanche 20 avril 2008 à 20:25 +0300, Alon Bar-Lev a écrit :
> > > On 4/20/08, Gilles Dartiguelongue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > for what it's worth, as a gnome dev
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Nor do most Unix apps, since they tend to be written in C using all
> those C library functions that work on null terminated strings.
>
> Null introduces far more problems than it solves, character-wise...
>
..but it's fine as a terminator, if you know what you're doing.
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:02:29 +0100
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry to get technical but how difficult is it really to change USE
> flag names? I appreciate that users are out of sync yadda yadda, but
> could this kind of thing not be considered out of band data similar
> to news?
>
On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 06:33 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:27:21 -0700
> Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My interpretation is pkg_* counts as runtime (I can imagine a package
> > wanting to run itself at this point), so packages in RDEPEND should
> > be usabl
Please remember to re-run autotools if you change Makefile.am and/or
configure.ac (or configure.in if the package uses the old name, or
configure.in.in for KDE-based packages). Especially with autoconf 2.62
release this becomes important as some package might try to re-run
autotools on its own and
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 18:06:07 +0200
> Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'd say we should convert it to a global use flag now with a good
>> description and change it to gnome-keyring later in case we really
>> have a package which needs 'keyring' for something
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sun, 20 Apr 2008
22:17:27 -0700:
> I guess the RDEPEND+DEPEND case would save an ebuild dev the work of
> specifying the COMMON_DEPEND list, but other than that, I can't think of
> any benefits. It would force both
2008-04-21 12:05 Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał(a):
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> > cat/a-1: RDEPEND cat/b
> > cat/b-1: RDEPEND cat/a
> >
> > This is solvable. If package managers can't solve this, they can't
> > install Gnome off a stage 3...
> >
>
> Which are the packages involved in su
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:10:53 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >> Really, it seems to be an additional type of dependency that
> >> neither DEPEND or RDEPEND fully describe, and this DEPEND+RDEPEND
> >> idea isn't quite capturing it either.
> >
> > Yup, and f
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Really, it seems to be an additional type of dependency that neither
DEPEND or RDEPEND fully describe, and this DEPEND+RDEPEND idea isn't
quite capturing it either.
Yup, and for future EAPIs labels can fix this. But we have to have a
sound solution for current EAPIs.
Us
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
cat/a-1: RDEPEND cat/b
cat/b-1: RDEPEND cat/a
This is solvable. If package managers can't solve this, they can't
install Gnome off a stage 3...
Which are the packages involved in such cycle?
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.g
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:52:01PM +0400, Peter Volkov wrote:
> sys-apps/ipmitool
> sys-apps/ipmiutil
> sys-libs/freeipmi
> sys-libs/openipmi
> sys-apps/edac-utils
>
> and most of them are maintained by robbat2. So Robin, please,
> comment! :)
Please don't CC me since I am actually on the list.
I
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 10:52:57 +0200
"Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | cat/a-1 is installed and has RDEPEND cat/b
> | cat/a-2 is to be installed and has DEPEND cat/b and RDEPEND =cat/b-2
> | cat/b-1 is installed and has RDEPEND cat/a
> | cat/b-2 is to be installed and has DEPEN
В Вск, 20/04/2008 в 20:02 +0200, Tiziano Müller пишет:
> What do you think of putting edac and ipmi stuff (and maybe other
> server-related monitoring/controlling stuff) into the sysadmin herd?
>
> Alternative: Create a new herd (name?) for such tools.
Actually this thread follows discussion in b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:17:27 -0700
| Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> I don't think I understand the difference between the effects of
|> these two options.
|
| cat/a-1 is installed and has RDEPEND cat/b
| cat/a-2
21 matches
Mail list logo
