On 12/17/2010 06:13 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 15:25 Fri 17 Dec , Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> Things get messier when you've got || ( a >b-2.1 ) and b-2.0 is
>> installed and a is not. Should b be upgraded to 2.1, or should a be
>> selected?
>
> It depends ... see later.
>
>> What about if
# Samuli Suominen (19 Dec 2010)
# Orphaned package, still using deprecated HAL
# Removal in 30 days, bug 344313
app-misc/hal-cups-utils
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18-12-2010 18:35, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:25:04 +
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> So would anyone be especially opposed to making "best leftmost" an
>> explicit requirement, enforced by repoman where possible (at least for
>>
# Samuli Suominen (19 Dec 2010)
# Graphical interface for sys-apps/hal. Removal in 30 days.
gnome-extra/gnome-device-manager
# Samuli Suominen (19 Dec 2010)
# Replaced by rox-base/rox-media, bug 313431, Comment #2
# Still using obsolete sys-apps/hal and gnome-base/gnome-mount,
# bug 349012, Co
On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 20:48:26 -0600
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> I don't know of anyone who's actually done this, but setting IUSE
> based on ACCEPT_KEYWORDS being ~arch should be possible. There may be
> better or easier solutions.
Uhm... IUSE has to be metadata-invariant.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
sign
On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:25:04 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> So would anyone be especially opposed to making "best leftmost" an
> explicit requirement, enforced by repoman where possible (at least for
> the >= / < case)?
I already thought that was the case, so +1 from me.
--
fonts, gcc-porting
On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 20:13:55 -0600
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > What about if you decide upon a early on, and then later on
> > something hard-depends upon b?
>
> Then you're collapsing the graph too early. =)
> (speaking as an utter novice)
Yeah, but unfortunately, there's no way to figure out wh
On 12/18/2010 01:57 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 18-12-2010 02:45:06 +0100, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>>
>> Problem #1: USE flags cannot contain "." characters.
>>
>> The following solutions have been suggested:
>> - Add support for "." characters in USE flags in EAPI="4".
>
> L
On 18-12-2010 02:45:06 +0100, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>
> Problem #1: USE flags cannot contain "." characters.
>
> The following solutions have been suggested:
> - Add support for "." characters in USE flags in EAPI="4".
Like Donnie said, this feels like a purely cosmetic chan
