Hi,
As the Gentoo Qt team has announced six months ago, Qt3 is about to be
masked now (see bug 283429). We sent another mail with a timeline at
the end of December. Most of the issues surrounding the mask and
removal of Qt3 have been solved. But we see ourselves confronted with
one remaining issue
On 02/21/2010 04:35 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 15.21, Zac Medico wrote:
>
> Likely there wouldn't be any breakage with it doing it in EAPI 3 but it
> would be against the eclass contract of not changing expected behavior.
Given that check_license already returns si
On 21.2.2010 15.21, Zac Medico wrote:
Likely there wouldn't be any breakage with it doing it in EAPI 3 but it
would be against the eclass contract of not changing expected behavior.
>>>
>>> Given that check_license already returns silently if the user has
>>> accepted the appropriate
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2010-02-21 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
x11-misc/icebgset 2010-02-17 09:09:44 phosphan
x11-misc/icecc 2010-02-17 09:09:45 phosphan
x11-misc/iceke
On 02/21/2010 03:00 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 14.49, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 02/21/2010 02:36 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>> On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since po
On 21.2.2010 14.49, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 02/21/2010 02:36 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE supp
On 02/21/2010 02:36 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>>> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
Hi,
Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
can think about deprecating check
On 21.2.2010 14.17, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
>>> can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to
>>> avoid using
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:31:25AM +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> -> Ebuilds for Extensions in-tree: The Gentoo Mozilla team will not
> ship ebuilds for extensions such as noscript and weave anymore. We
> will only have ebuilds for extensions which are linux-specific and
> compiled; such as enigm
On 02/21/2010 09:08 AM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
>> can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to
>> avoid using PROPERTIES=interactive in cases when it is due
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> -> Revival of #gentoo-mozilla @ FreeNode: The mozilla team has
> expanded in recent times, and with that we have decided to revive the
> ages-old #gentoo-mozilla irc channel. Users are welcome to idle,
> discuss, and ask for help on that c
On Feb 21st, Sunday, the Gentoo Mozilla Team had an informal meeting
to discuss some of the recent changes which have a large-ish impact on
users. Below is a list of them and the decisions that were taken.
After the list is a description of each decision.
-> SQLite with Firefox: Firefox will use t
On Sun, 21 February 2010 Fabian Groffen wrote:
> I recently proposed to enable this by default for cmake, but got some
> negative feedback for that. Hence, I'd like to know the opinion of
> more people on the issue.
>
> In the past we have had verbose build systems, that printed a lot of
> messa
# Samuli Suominen (21 Feb 2010)
# libkleo doesn't install required include files anymore,
# because they are meant only for internal usage. this means
# kopete-cryptography won't compile anymore, and as such,
# will be removed from portage. bug 306199 and bug 306115.
# masked for removal in 30 day
Hi all,
Inspired by the recent poppler move from autoconf to cmake for its
build system, the following.
Given that poppler didn't compile on at least two arches, I found that
cmake is pretty much terse in its output, especially when errors are
encountered. Often it is important to know how the c
# Pacho Ramos (21 Feb 2010)
# Upstream is dead since years, doesn't compile against
# gtk+-2.18 and nobody want to maintain it (#292211)
# Masked for removal in 60 days
x11-libs/gtk+extra
Best regards
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
On 20.2.2010 14.28, Zac Medico wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since portage-2.1.7.x is stable now, with ACCEPT_LICENSE support, we
> can think about deprecating check_license [1]. This will allow us to
> avoid using PROPERTIES=interactive in cases when it is due to
> check_license alone, since anything with a l
On 21.2.2010 1.11, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>
> Is it acceptable for another dev to jump in and add RESTRICT="test" to
> an ebuild if the maintainer does not respond to a bug report in a timely
> manner?
>
Preference order:
1. Fix the tests
2. Disable just the failing test
3. RESTRICT="test"
On 02/20/2010 09:23 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
The MySQL 5.1 news item with all updates is now commited, and 5.1.x have
been unblocked in package.mask.
It looks like that news item is visible to users running stable as well.
When 5.1 eventually goes stable we might want to re-announce it si
Hi!
On Sat, 20 Feb 2010, Ryan Hill wrote:
[... "Please use the test suites, you're making lives easier." ...]
Also, if the test failure is "portable", you don't waste the time
of N arch maintainers that run into the same problem on wy
slower machines than yours.
Thanks,
Tobias
On 2/21/10 10:40 AM, Thilo Bangert wrote:
> "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." said:
>> The concern here may be that it's papering over the real problem, but
>> the good side is that it'd make running with FEATURES=test much easier.
>
> which is a good thing, since more tests will be run. RESTRICT="test"
> sho
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." said:
> On 2/21/10 5:08 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > I have one simple request. When you make a non-trivial change to an
> > ebuild - a patch, a version bump, anything that can effect the
> > behaviour of the package - please run the test suite.
>
> Yeah, on my dev box I just run
On 2/21/10 5:08 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> I have one simple request. When you make a non-trivial change to an ebuild -
> a patch, a version bump, anything that can effect the behaviour of the
> package - please run the test suite.
Yeah, on my dev box I just run with FEATURES="test" all the time. The
23 matches
Mail list logo
