В Птн, 13/03/2009 в 19:09 +0100, Federico Ferri пишет:
> btw, on a different topic: the number of bugs on tcltk (8.5) has
> lowered a bit.
> maybe it's time to unmask it and have package maintainers fix the
> outdated apps?
A number of packages depend on itcl which does not builds with 8.5. It
is
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> In terms of goals, [1] is what I'd consider to be an ideal list.
One thing I would personally add to the list is to somehow be able to
set certain packages not to update more than x often. There are some
packages which users care about wh
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:22:16 +0100
> Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
>> But in comment 4 user ask about updates itself. If we have live
>> package and revision does not change it is pointless waste of
>> resources to recompile it usualy.
> * Allowi
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:43:09 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> So i guess adding wrapper around remaining relevant phases is just
> bit coding around.
It's not. Not if you want to be able to do background fetches, not if
you want to be able to show the user at --pretend time what's going to
happen, an
Dne sobota 14 Březen 2009 20:32:52 Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a):
> Doing this properly is an awful lot of work and a lot trickier than
> initially apparent. There was a discussion in #gentoo-council about it
> after the last meeting; unfortunately I don't have logs.
Hm i try to crawl around if i find
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 15:31 Sat 14 Mar , Ben de Groot (yngwin) wrote:
>> yngwin 09/03/14 15:31:28
>>
>> Modified: qt4.eclass
>> Log:
>> Update qt4.eclass
>
> comet $ cvs diff -r1.50 -r1.51 qt4.eclass | diffstat
> qt4.eclass | 136
> ++
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:22:16 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> But in comment 4 user ask about updates itself. If we have live
> package and revision does not change it is pointless waste of
> resources to recompile it usualy.
Doing this properly is an awful lot of work and a lot trickier than
initial
hi,
if you find your time would you mind pointing your eyes on bug 262010 [1].
There is interesting idea about loging usefull informations about repository
for further usage (that thing i find interesting and already implemented [2]).
But in comment 4 user ask about updates itself. If we have li
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:02:45 +0300
Peter Volkov wrote:
> I'm not sure here. Is it safe to export src_prepare function for
> EAPI=0,1?
Nope. You're only allowed to EXPORT_FUNCTIONS something that's a phase
function for your chosen EAPI.
(Incidentally, you're also only allowed to call EXPORT_FUNCT
В Чтв, 12/03/2009 в 21:02 +0100, Alex Legler пишет:
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~a3li/ruby/gems.eclass.txt
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~a3li/ruby/gems.eclass.diff
You have:
EXPORT_FUNCTIONS src_unpack src_prepare src_configure src_compile src_install
I'm not sure here. Is it safe to export src_prepare f
On 15:31 Sat 14 Mar , Ben de Groot (yngwin) wrote:
> yngwin 09/03/14 15:31:28
>
> Modified: qt4.eclass
> Log:
> Update qt4.eclass
comet $ cvs diff -r1.50 -r1.51 qt4.eclass | diffstat
qt4.eclass | 136 ++---
1 fil
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 14:05 Fri 13 Mar , Michael Higgins wrote:
Even if they are, an IRC log is a *terrible* way to document an issue.
I agree. So is a mailing-list archive that is also never summarized.
It's not the location that makes it a problem, it's the volume of
information an
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> I would like to know, if there is some policy about editing skel.* files or
> who owns/maintains them.
> Additionally, i suggest some changes to skel.ebuild:
>
Posts diffs to gentoo-dev and if there are no objections --> commit.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Descriptio
On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 19:09 +0100, Federico Ferri wrote:
> potential issues:
> this could become troublesome if there is a tcl extension installed,
> and is needed both for tcl 8.5 and tcl 8.6. it should be reinstalled
> after each 'eselect tcltk set ...'
We face similar issues with multiple vers
14 matches
Mail list logo
