On 07/06/2012 06:17 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> But either way, if "SlotABI" is supposed to convey "A change that can
> occur to a package that means other packages that were built on it
> need to be rebuilt" , then this is something we need.
Much like SLOT, SLOT/ABI-sub-slot as it's implemented in
On 1 July 2012 05:12, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> Do all packages need to be rebuilt when some of these use flags
> change? Maybe auto-appending those particular flags (ithreads, debug)
> to IUSE and putting them on the dev-lang/perl dep is all that'll be
> needed, if this is the case.
Not all pa
On Friday 06 July 2012 11:32:22 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> However, I remember that there used to be some problems with SHA256
> and DSA keys. Before we add "--digest-algo SHA256" to the default
> PORTAGE_GPG_SIGNING_COMMAND in make.globals, I'd like to ask for
> feedback if it works without problems.
Hi all,
After the SHA1 hashes have been banned from our Manifest files [1],
the question arose in #gentoo-portage if the default algorithm used
for manifest signing should also be changed to something different
from SHA1 (which is still the GnuPG default). According to the table
in section 14 of R
