Dne Út 22. ledna 2013 19:37:12, Pacho Ramos napsal(a):
> I agree, thanks for pointing it. Just attached patch should handle it.
Still not nice enough for me :D
Use the ECLASS_VARIABLE to describe it @DEFAULT_UNSET is what you seek, see
git-2.eclass.
Tom
signature.asc
Description: This is a digi
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 01:15 -0200, Rafael Goncalves Martins wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 14:44 +0100, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Petteri Räty
> >> wrote:
> >> > On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 14:44 +0100, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> > On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> >> Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candida
On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 14:44 +0100, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> >> Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates
> >> for January.
> >>
> >> I don't want to annoy people
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:06:29PM +0100, Alexander Berntsen wrote
> As a long-time user, I can't put myself in a first-time user's frame
> of reference. But it would be useful for me whenever I'm installing
> Gentoo on a new device, if I were able to have the profile's USE-flags
> listed. (I know
Rich Freeman posted on Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:12:06 -0500 as excerpted:
> Should we therefore list all the flags on the system and which ones are
> enabled and disabled?
>
> I guess we could, but it is a REALLY long list.
>
> In practice I find that the way I tend to use USE flags is that I just
>
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:51:54AM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 10:22 PM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> > 22.01.2013 08:23, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >> I guess this change is ok, given that I can opt-out fairly easily. Zac's
> >> workaround for binary packages makes me feel better too.
> >
> > I
El mar, 22-01-2013 a las 10:33 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal escribió:
> 2013/1/22 Pacho Ramos :
> > El mar, 22-01-2013 a las 08:16 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal escribió:
> >> Would'nt be better to just set some variable in the ebuild, rather
> >> than call function that touches empty file?
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >>
On 01/21/2013 10:22 PM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 22.01.2013 08:23, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> I guess this change is ok, given that I can opt-out fairly easily. Zac's
>> workaround for binary packages makes me feel better too.
>
> I am curious, can not this check be added to eclass? Or eclass does not
>
On 01/22/2013 01:22 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 22 January 2013 03:56, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 01/21/2013 07:45 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>> My suspicion is that portage's environment save/restore process will
>>> overwrite any setting I attempt to make on the destination host.
>>
>> If necessa
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates
>> for January.
>>
>> I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the
>> same time I also received
2013/1/22 Petteri Räty :
>
> I have an RSS feed for this purpose at:
>
> http://gentoo.petteriraty.eu/stable.rss
>
> Sources are available here:
>
> https://github.com/betelgeuse/scripts/blob/master/rss-changelog
>
> Maybe this is something that should be pushed to official Gentoo
> infrastructure
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:10:12PM +0100, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
> > from the tree, for the week ending 2013-01-20 23h59 UTC.
>
> How about sending those mails t
On 13.1.2013 0.49, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates
> for January.
>
> I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the
> same time I also received lots of positive feedback about the effort to
> keep the sta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 22/01/13 13:12, Rich Freeman wrote:
As a long-time user, I can't put myself in a first-time user's frame of
reference. But it would be useful for me whenever I'm installing
Gentoo on a new device, if I were able to have the profile's USE-flags
li
On Wednesday, January 16, 2013 07:14:12 PM Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne So 12. ledna 2013 14:49:52, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. napsal(a):
> > Please review attached automatically generated stabilization candidates
> > for January.
> >
> > I don't want to annoy people with automatically filed bugs, and at the
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Alexander Berntsen
wrote:
>
> While I tend towards the cleaner design, not the "don't fix what isn't
> *broken*" approach -- I'm fine either way. But I think the handbook or
> some tool should obnoxiously spit the flags (and a minor
> "justification" for each flag
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 22 January 2013 03:28, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Dustin C. Hatch
>> wrote:
>>> The package defaults have gotten out of hand, in my opinion. I use
>>> default/linux/amd64/10.0 on all my machines and my /etc/
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 6:11 AM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
> IMHO the number of cases where CONFIG_CHECK is reliable is so small that
> making it fatal will only bloat make.conf and env with a new var for most
> users.
Tend to agree. I just got an elog out of udisks complaining about
USB_SUSPEND n
Il 22/01/2013 04:38, Robin H. Johnson ha scritto:
I'm raising this patch because of the recent spate of bugs with the
latest udev that now fails to boot your system if CONFIG_DEVTMPFS is
not available in your kernel.
Bugs: 408947, 409393, 437320, 453074
CONFIG_CHECK has not been fatal for
2013/1/22 Pacho Ramos :
> El mar, 22-01-2013 a las 08:16 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal escribió:
>> Would'nt be better to just set some variable in the ebuild, rather
>> than call function that touches empty file?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>
> I think it can be done in either way... but I don't see the advantage of
>
On 22 January 2013 03:56, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 07:45 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> My suspicion is that portage's environment save/restore process will
>> overwrite any setting I attempt to make on the destination host.
>
> If necessary, you can use /etc/portage/bashrc to override
> CONF
El mar, 22-01-2013 a las 08:16 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal escribió:
> 2013/1/21 Pacho Ramos :
> > This can be useful when, for example, doc contents are modified. You can
> > then rely on using REPLACING_VERSIONS in your ebuild to print messages
> > when people updates from versions using old docs
> >
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
While I tend towards the cleaner design, not the "don't fix what isn't
*broken*" approach -- I'm fine either way. But I think the handbook or
some tool should obnoxiously spit the flags (and a minor
"justification" for each flag and/or the set of fla
24 matches
Mail list logo
