On 5/3/2013 16:08, René Neumann wrote:
Am 03.05.2013 22:20, schrieb Zac Medico:
Is it worth changing?
Nope. What's worth changing is the excessive use of USE_EXPAND for no
reason (your described usecase makes sense for reasonable USE_EXPAND
stuff like VIDEO_CARDS). But seems like I'm the only
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/03/2013 05:28 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:08 PM, René Neumann wrote:
>> Am 03.05.2013 22:20, schrieb Zac Medico:
>>> Is it worth changing?
>>
>> Nope. What's worth changing is the excessive use of USE_EXPAND for no
>> reas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/03/2013 04:20 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 05/03/2013 05:59 AM, Ren￩ Neumann wrote:
>> Am 24.04.2013 11:51, schrieb Ren￩ Neumann:
>>> As more and more packages seem to (mis)use USE_EXPAND: Can we get the
>>> possibility to set this directly in pack
On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:41:33 +0200
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 03 May 2013 16:15:35 +0200
> hasufell wrote:
> > We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> > warnings with a note that it should be reported upstream.
> But not all of them.
I'm not sure what these warnings accomplish
On Fri, 3 May 2013 15:46:41 +0200
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>
> > Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
> > but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
> > packages I maintain. That wi
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:08 PM, René Neumann wrote:
> Am 03.05.2013 22:20, schrieb Zac Medico:
>> Is it worth changing?
>
> Nope. What's worth changing is the excessive use of USE_EXPAND for no
> reason (your described usecase makes sense for reasonable USE_EXPAND
> stuff like VIDEO_CARDS). But se
Am 03.05.2013 22:20, schrieb Zac Medico:
> Is it worth changing?
Nope. What's worth changing is the excessive use of USE_EXPAND for no
reason (your described usecase makes sense for reasonable USE_EXPAND
stuff like VIDEO_CARDS). But seems like I'm the only one concerned by
this, so I should probab
On Fri, 03 May 2013 13:20:15 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
> Note that PMS says USE_EXPAND variables are supposed to be treated as
> incremental.
PMS says nothing about user configuration.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Dne Pá 3. května 2013 10:39:29, Rich Freeman napsal(a):
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:15 AM, hasufell wrote:
> > We don't need that. We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> > warnings with a note that it should be reported upstream.
> >
> > Turning them into errors does not improve anythin
On 05/03/2013 05:59 AM, René Neumann wrote:
> Am 24.04.2013 11:51, schrieb René Neumann:
>> As more and more packages seem to (mis)use USE_EXPAND: Can we get the
>> possibility to set this directly in package.use? Having to write
>> 'claws_mail_plugins_foo' does not help readability, and setting it
On 03/05/13 19:56, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 03/05/13 20:33, Justin Lecher (jlec) wrote:
>> jlec13/05/03 17:33:56
>>
>>Modified: metadata.xml ChangeLog
>>Added:id3lib-3.8.3-r9.ebuild
>>Log:
>>media-libs/id3lib: Fix obsolete macros to work with a
On 03/05/13 20:56, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 03/05/13 20:33, Justin Lecher (jlec) wrote:
jlec13/05/03 17:33:56
Modified: metadata.xml ChangeLog
Added:id3lib-3.8.3-r9.ebuild
Log:
media-libs/id3lib: Fix obsolete macros to work with automake-1.13,
#4
On 03/05/13 20:33, Justin Lecher (jlec) wrote:
jlec13/05/03 17:33:56
Modified: metadata.xml ChangeLog
Added:id3lib-3.8.3-r9.ebuild
Log:
media-libs/id3lib: Fix obsolete macros to work with automake-1.13, #467704;
bumped to EAPI=5 and autotools-util
Hi all,
I would like to have your opinion- is there any valid reason that a keyword
request for a rather central package remains completely unanswered by some
arches for 10 months?
Cheers,
Andreas
-- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --
Betreff: [Bug 428356] Please (re-)keyword ne
Let's assume that all libtool files have a consistent format and contain
a line stating 'shouldnotlink=(yes|no)'. We use that to distinguish
modules from libraries, so we can as well use it to validate the .la
file to avoid removing non-libtool .la files.
This should also make the big 'if' a bit m
On Fri, 03 May 2013 16:15:35 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> We don't need that.
I was actually firmly agreeing on that point. The question was where
this was all coming from, and I was pointing out that it's regarded as
inherently good "elsewhere".
> We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> wa
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:15 AM, hasufell wrote:
> We don't need that. We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> warnings with a note that it should be reported upstream.
>
> Turning them into errors does not improve anything.
Yup - you can't really compare Gentoo build workflows with thos
On 05/03/2013 03:46 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>
>> Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
>> but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
>> packages I maintain. That will change now,
On 05/03/2013 09:46 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>
>> Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
>> but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
>> packages I maintain. That will change now,
On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
> Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
> but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
> packages I maintain. That will change now, upon learning of this
> policy.
Debian here and there
Am 24.04.2013 11:51, schrieb René Neumann:
> As more and more packages seem to (mis)use USE_EXPAND: Can we get the
> possibility to set this directly in package.use? Having to write
> 'claws_mail_plugins_foo' does not help readability, and setting it in
> make.conf is also not the right way (as is
On 3 May 2013 16:36, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
> On 03.05.2013 10:06, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> On 3 May 2013 12:09, Ryan Hill wrote:
>>> Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
>>> packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
>>> Makefile was
On 03.05.2013 10:06, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 3 May 2013 12:09, Ryan Hill wrote:
>> Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
>> packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
>> Makefile was being patched to remove -g from CXXFLAGS but -Wer
On 3 May 2013 12:09, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
> packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
> Makefile was being patched to remove -g from CXXFLAGS but -Werror on the same
> line was left in. Just in c
24 matches
Mail list logo
