On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 22:35:25 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Did anyone already propose specifying this in metadata.xml?
Yup. That's a no-go, since metadata.xml is quite rightly treated as
being "not suitable for anything the package manager really needs".
It also moves the EAPI
On 05:20 Tue 10 Jun , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Yet GLEP 55 is the only solution that's been proposed that solves the
> requirements. And your entire argument boils down to "file extension
> changes don't look pretty", for some arbitrary value of pretty that
> also precludes index.html.en and in
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:09:04 -0600
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > And a file extension is far less obscurely complex than enforcing
> > arbitrary syntax restrictions upon ebuilds.
>
> I disagree. One is exposed to devs only as ebuild syntax; the other
> is ex
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> And a file extension is far less obscurely complex than enforcing
> arbitrary syntax restrictions upon ebuilds.
I disagree. One is exposed to devs only as ebuild syntax; the other is
exposed in an inappropriate location to everyone looking at the portage
tree.
> No it ca
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:36:24 -0600
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course I don't mean that. But humans and computers are each good
> at a complementary set of things. Computers handle obscure complexity
> easily; humans do not, so it's better to let computers make our lives
> easier
Joe Peterson schrieb:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:49:08 -0600
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, in general, if you rely on extensions changing every time a
program cannot deal with a new feature of a file format, it would be
quite crazy. For example, if C programs
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:15:56 -0600
> Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes, if everyone is perfect and remembers to do things perfectly
>> right, there would never be issues in many things, but when you make
>> something more complicated, there will be more errors.
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:15:56 -0600
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, if everyone is perfect and remembers to do things perfectly
> right, there would never be issues in many things, but when you make
> something more complicated, there will be more errors.
So we shouldn't ever change
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:49:08 -0600
> Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm not saying it's a lot harder. But it is more complex and less
>> elegant. Also, it is error-prone. If someone, by habit, looks for
>> all "*.ebuild", he will miss a portion of the ebuilds
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 19:49:08 -0600
Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not saying it's a lot harder. But it is more complex and less
> elegant. Also, it is error-prone. If someone, by habit, looks for
> all "*.ebuild", he will miss a portion of the ebuilds and not even
> realize it at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> 1) Increase of [needless] complexity in filenames/extensions (and only one
>> example of the impact is that searching for ebuild files becomes less
>> straightforward), when things like SLOT, EAPI, etc., etc., seem to
>> naturally belong as part of the script conte
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Joe Peterson wrote:
Technical reasons to avoid the filename:
1) Increase of [needless] complexity in filenames/extensions (and only one
example of the impact is that searching for ebuild files becomes less
straightforward), when things like SLOT, EAPI, etc., etc., seem t
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 11:12 Sun 08 Jun , Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
>> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
>> have a few technical questions for you:
>>
>> 1. GLEP54
>> 2. GLEP55
>
> I don't have any particular objections to these, besides the vague
> aest
* Matthias Schwarzott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Well, upstream is just one file/package: vdr-streamdev-0.3.4.tgz
What I suspected.
Actually, I'm not interested in that package. Otherwise there
already would be a fork which keeps that separation.
> But we want to revert this now, because sp
* Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Hi,
> Upstream doesn't always know better for our setup (it may try to second
there are also a lot of other things, upstream tends not to know ;-P
> guess our settings by looking for particular automake/autoconf
> versions), it will show
On 11:12 Sun 08 Jun , Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
> have a few technical questions for you:
>
> 1. GLEP54
> 2. GLEP55
I don't have any particular objections to these, besides the vague
aesthetic one of having EAP
On Montag, 9. Juni 2008, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Matthias Schwarzott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> Hi,
>
> > This post is about how to create a nice upgrade path when merging two
> > packages.
> > The packages I care about are
> > media-plugins/vdr-streamdev-{client,server}, that we wanted to
On 13:41 Sun 08 Jun , Alex Howells wrote:
> I would like to see Council move towards a more compressed meeting
> format -- people presenting arguments need to work out their stuff
> before bringing it up in the meeting, and to allow for quick
> turn-around of decisions I'd suggest fortnightly m
* Arun Raghavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Hi,
> We were just discussing if it makes sense to either die or issue a QA
> notice if one of the do* functions fail. It turns out that there's
> already a bug for this [1]. This potentially applies to all helper
> functions that don't currently die o
Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Tiziano Müller wrote:
>> Having the EAPI versioned like this: X.Y where X is the postfix part of
>> the ebuild (foo-1.0.ebuild-X) and Y the "EAPI=Y" in the ebuild itself we
>> could increment Y in case the changes to the EAPI don't break sourcing
>> (again: a package manager w
* Matthias Schwarzott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Hi,
> This post is about how to create a nice upgrade path when merging two
> packages.
> The packages I care about are media-plugins/vdr-streamdev-{client,server},
> that we wanted to merge into one media-plugins/vdr-streamdev package.
please
Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> I'm afraid you are mixing up emails from this thread. I got
>>> complaints about how wrongly the PMS is written, e.g. academic paper
>>> markup vs plain text, natural language used to specify syntax while a
>>> grammar notation like EBNF would be be
2008/6/9 Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:27:56 +0200
>> Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> > No point. A 0 package manager still couldn't use a 0.1 ebuild.
>>> >
>>> That's true, it has at least to be awa
Tiziano Müller wrote:
Having the EAPI versioned like this: X.Y where X is the postfix part of the
ebuild (foo-1.0.ebuild-X) and Y the "EAPI=Y" in the ebuild itself we could
increment Y in case the changes to the EAPI don't break sourcing (again: a
package manager will have to mask those ebuilds)
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 12:19:21PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > I love aliasing :)
> Any pybugz lovers, this patch will allow use of aliases.
For anybody that wants nicer bugzilla URLS, you can use these:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/${NUMERIC}
http://bugs.gentoo.org/alias/${NUMERIC}
http://bugs.ge
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:27:56 +0200
> Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> > No point. A 0 package manager still couldn't use a 0.1 ebuild.
>> >
>> That's true, it has at least to be aware the there's an EAPI.
>> But how does such a packag
Peter Weller wrote:
> [..snip..]
>
> This doesn't, to me, really seem to be relevant to the original purpose
> of the thread. Can we either start a new thread or get this one back on
> topic?
In the context of whether this GLEP is complete and should be approved it
does make sense. It is importan
On 19:03 Mon 09 Jun , Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> Robert Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > # [tracker] GCC 4.3 porting
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198121
>
> or https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=gcc-4.3
>
> >
> > # [TRACKER] ebuilds failing to build agai
Roy Bamford wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2008.06.05 01:00, ?ukasz Damentko wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2008/2009 are open now and will be
>> open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2008).
>
> Team,
>
> I don't want
Luca Barbato wrote:
Thomas Anderson wrote:
As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than
LaTeX!"
It's not those people's prerogative.
Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small.
See the devmanual. It uses completely different XML markup. It is XML
Thomas Anderson wrote:
I personally have had no problems reading and/or understanding PMS, and
I've had to reference a fair bit of it. I'd like to hear exactly who has
problems with what sections and how to fix that.
As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!"
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 12:27:52 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The current council has raised "never actually deciding anything" to
> an art form.
Barking up the wrong (portage) tree again?
Kindest regards,
JeR
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 06:44:59 -0700
"Chip Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Although it'll be a bit slower than a direct grep: for m in `find
> /usr/portage -name metadata.xml `; do grep -Rn foo $m;done
That would be horribly slow by comparison. :)
Kind regards,
JeR
--
gentoo-dev@lists.g
Robert Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> # [tracker] GCC 4.3 porting
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198121
or https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=gcc-4.3
>
> # [TRACKER] ebuilds failing to build against sys-libs/glibc-2.8
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=225459
or h
On Monday 09 June 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> it seems packages are failing when built with glibc-2.8 and/or
> gcc-4.3. these are issues in the package, not the toolchain.
> previous versions were lazy and included API "bleeding" which
> packages took advantage of. with these newer versions, t
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 14:18 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> > As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!"
> > It's not those people's prerogative.
>
> Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small.
>
> > The people who wrot
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 01:26:53PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:18:01 +0200
> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
> > > for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language
> > > to use.
>
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:18:01 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
> > for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language
> > to use.
>
> The main point being using latex prevents people from modify it.
Are y
On 9 Jun 2008, at 14:18, Luca Barbato wrote:
The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language to
use.
The main point being using latex prevents people from modify it.
Your opinion.
You don't *have* to read PMS i
Thomas Anderson wrote:
As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!"
It's not those people's prerogative.
Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small.
The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
for themselves(as they will be
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 01:00:52PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 09-06-2008 11:49:35 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
> >> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
>
Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I usually do something like this:
I used to do that too, but it's quite slower than the */*/$blah, because
it has to visit all the directories on the grep.
Give it a try, took me quite a while to get used to it but it works
nicely.
--
Diego "Flamee
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:56:33 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:28:03 -0700
> > Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Global variables must only contain invariant values (see >> link="#metadata-invariance">link). If a glob
On 09-06-2008 11:49:35 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
>> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>>> - rewrite it as
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:28:03 -0700
Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Global variables must only contain invariant values (see link="#metadata-invariance">link). If a global variable's value
is invariant, it may have the value that would be generated at any
given po
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:28:03 -0700
Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Global variables must only contain invariant values (see link="#metadata-invariance">link). If a global variable's value
> is invariant, it may have the value that would be generated at any
> given point in the build s
On Monday 09 June 2008 11:28:03 Josh Saddler wrote:
> Let's change all that hideous, barely readable multiple brace/bracket
> abuse into something more human-readable, shall we?
Please explain why angle brackets are readable but braces aren't.
>
> bunch o'neat code
>
Wow, you mean we just type
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:49:35 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
anyone who thinks so bothered to p
Hi,
Vlastimil Babka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> opfer (Christian Faulhammer)
Thanks, but I decline.
V-Li
--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode
http://www.faulhammer.org/>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:49:35 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> >>> anyone who thinks so bothered to provide
On Monday 09 June 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Mike Frysinger a écrit :
> > please refrain from assigning to toolchain. if you have questions, feel
> > free to ask.
>
> Is there a howto for users/developers when migrating to glibc 2.8?
> Something other than a ChangeLog (too much detail) or a NEWS
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
- rewrite it as an rfc using a markup among xmlrfc, docbook, guidexml.
What techni
[..snip..]
This doesn't, to me, really seem to be relevant to the original purpose
of the thread. Can we either start a new thread or get this one back on
topic?
welp
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
> That's true, it has at least to be aware the there's an EAPI.
> But how does such a package manager handle .ebuild-0 files? Ignore them?
> Failing because of unknown files in a package-dir?
> Should we care about package managers not being aware of the existence of
> EAPI's?
Current portage woul
Peter Volkov a écrit :
Whenever you modify anything in profiles directory, please, fill in
ChangeLog. ChangeLogs became useless if only part of developers fill
them.
For additional info, echangelog works in there too as I found out a few
days ago.
Cheers
--
Rémi Cardona
LRI, INRIA
[EMAIL
Mike Frysinger a écrit :
please refrain from assigning to toolchain. if you have questions, feel free
to ask.
(too lazy to look for it, as we already have our hands full with other
library breakages)
Is there a howto for users/developers when migrating to glibc 2.8?
Something other than a
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> > anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>
> - rewrite it as an rfc using a markup among xmlrfc, docbook, guidexml.
What technical reason is t
On 9 Jun 2008, at 10:50, Luca Barbato wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I'm afraid you are mixing up emails from this thread. I got
complaints about how wrongly the PMS is written, e.g. academic paper
markup vs plain text, natural language used to specify syntax
while a
grammar notation like EB
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I'm afraid you are mixing up emails from this thread. I got
complaints about how wrongly the PMS is written, e.g. academic paper
markup vs plain text, natural language used to specify syntax while a
grammar notation like EBNF would be better suited, when I asked
people why
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:27:56 +0200
Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > No point. A 0 package manager still couldn't use a 0.1 ebuild.
> >
> That's true, it has at least to be aware the there's an EAPI.
> But how does such a package manager handle .ebuild-0 files?
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:28:57 +0200
"Denis Dupeyron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:58:40 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Usually in this category you put everybody that disag
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:26:00 +0100
Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 09 June 2008 09:06:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> > anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>
> Probably because you have such a long histo
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:58:40 +0200
> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Usually in this category you put everybody that disagrees with you,
>> no matter the topic.
>
> And what does that tell you about the average
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:45:37 +0200
> Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And why don't we change the versioning of the EAPI to a "X.Y" scheme
>> and demand that changes in the minor version must not break sourcing
>> of the ebuild with older package managers and t
it seems packages are failing when built with glibc-2.8 and/or gcc-4.3. these
are issues in the package, not the toolchain. previous versions were lazy
and included API "bleeding" which packages took advantage of. with these
newer versions, things bleed less means those packages break.
some
On Monday 09 June 2008 09:06:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't anyone
> who thinks so bothered to provide details?
Probably because you have such a long history of saying "it's broken" without
providing any details. Even when asked you some
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:58:40 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Anyone thinking that has a very limited understanding of how things
> > work.
>
> Usually in this category you put everybody that disagrees with you,
> no matter the topic.
And what does that t
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Anyone thinking that has a very limited understanding of how things
work.
Usually in this category you put everybody that disagrees with you, no
matter the topic.
Let's face it, there hasn't been any correct criticism, and any
complaints have been from people who don'
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:45:37 +0200
Tiziano Müller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And why don't we change the versioning of the EAPI to a "X.Y" scheme
> and demand that changes in the minor version must not break sourcing
> of the ebuild with older package managers and that major versions do.
> Major
Piotr Jaroszy?ski wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
> have a few technical questions for you:
>
> 1. GLEP54
Doit!
> 2. GLEP55
Good idea. But the GLEP still contains too many "may"'s and "should"'s.
Example: "[...] but note that one should n
Hello, Markus.
В Вск, 08/06/2008 в 19:28 +, Markus Ullmann (jokey) пишет:
> jokey 08/06/08 19:28:19
>
> Modified: use.local.desc
> Log:
> Rename webkitgtk to webkit-gtk
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.3576 profiles/use.local.desc
Whenever you modify
71 matches
Mail list logo
