Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removal of kdeprefix news item

On Sun, 22 May 2011 16:52:55 -0400 Jonathan Callen wrote: > Here's the updated news item, which I will be committing very > shortly. Please note that there is absolutely no version of portage > that was not in package.mask that would have problems with an EAPI-2 > atom in a news item because EAPI-

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: use of the /run directory

On Tue, 17 May 2011 19:12:38 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:50:32PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > I would be interested to hear how you plan to do the migration, > > given that everyone else has managed to screw it up... > > I'm not sure what you mean here. Openrc git

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2011-05-22 23h59 UTC

The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2011-05-22 23h59 UTC. Removals: app-emacs/calc 2011-05-18 19:09:55 ulm app-emacs/easypg2011-05-18 19:09:55 ulm app-emac

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: use of the /run directory

> > Hi ... I think the best decision is wait to FHS 3.0

[gentoo-dev] Re: Removal of kdeprefix news item

Here's the updated news item, which I will be committing very shortly. Please note that there is absolutely no version of portage that was not in package.mask that would have problems with an EAPI-2 atom in a news item because EAPI-2 support was added to portage at the same time as news item s

Re: [gentoo-dev] arch teams and better tools

On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Peter Volkov wrote: > Hi! > > В Вск, 22/05/2011 в 10:13 +0200, Thomas Kahle пишет: >> On 18:44 Sat 21 May     , "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > >> > Here's my answer to that, still in very early development: >> >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-dns/dnsmasq: ChangeLog dnsmasq-2.57-r1.ebuild

On 5/22/11 4:07 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: > Since you are not using EAPI=4 you need to add || die to every do* and > new* function. I just bumped to EAPI 4 then. Thanks! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] arch teams and better tools

Hi! В Вск, 22/05/2011 в 10:13 +0200, Thomas Kahle пишет: > On 18:44 Sat 21 May , "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > > Here's my answer to that, still in very early development: > > > Have you seen app-portage/tatt ? > https:

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: use of the /run directory

On 5/20/11 6:54 PM, Mike Pagano wrote: On Friday 20 May 2011 04:58:12 Luca Barbato wrote: On 5/17/11 6:57 PM, William Hubbs wrote: That shouldn't be read as endorsing the peculiar and conceptually broken init replacement called systemd. lu Just curious, would you mind elaborating on it's pecu

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-dns/dnsmasq: ChangeLog dnsmasq-2.57-r1.ebuild

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 22/05/2011 11:07 πμ, PaweA Hajdan (phajdan.jr) wrote: > phajdan.jr11/05/22 10:07:17 > > Modified: ChangeLog > Added:dnsmasq-2.57-r1.ebuild > Log: > Run as dedicated user instead of nobody, bug #360773. >

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-p2p/ghostwhitecrab

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 # Markos Chandras (22 May 2011) # Does not build against gcc-4.5. Bug #322361 # Removal in 30 days net-p2p/ghostwhitecrab - -- Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Li

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: sed script redundancy

On 21-05-2011 19:34:34 +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:56:00 +0200 > Fabian Groffen wrote: > > > sed -e "" "${file}" | diff "${file}" - > > > > followed by the actual sed -i -e ... > > > > This way I didn't need to write an intermediate file. > > The problem there is th

Re: [gentoo-dev] arch teams and better tools

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 22/05/2011 09:13 ??, Thomas Kahle wrote: > Hi > > On 18:44 Sat 21 May , "Pawe? Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> Recently there was a discussion about better tools for arch teams, to >> speed up stabilizations and make them less error-prone. >> >> Here'

Re: [gentoo-dev] arch teams and better tools

Hi On 18:44 Sat 21 May , "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Recently there was a discussion about better tools for arch teams, to > speed up stabilizations and make them less error-prone. > > Here's my answer to that, still in very early development: >