El lun, 29-07-2013 a las 21:07 -0400, Rich Freeman escribió:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Dustin C. Hatch
> wrote:
> > I think the point is that users may have an initramfs (that they built
> > manually or using some tool besides dracut or genkernel) that makes use of
> > cryptsetup/lvm2 bu
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:27:31 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller
> wrote:
> > Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch linear?
> > If it contains merge commits, then git format-patch / git am isn't
> > guaranteed to work.
>
> There are
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:32:12PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> How the /usr in other partition ended finally then? I though that, since
> there are a lot of things in / that rely in others in /usr, people were
> supposed to either use initramfs or busybox to get /usr mounted
Unfortunately it hasn'
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I still find it odd that some are able to apply that patch. I just
> tried again with git 1.8.3.2 and got the same behavior. If others are
> getting a patch that applies then there is something bizarre going on.
> I get a patch file that r
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch linear?
> If it contains merge commits, then git format-patch / git am isn't
> guaranteed to work.
There are branches. There is obviously /A/ linear path from the tag
to the hea
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Rich Freeman wrote:
> git clone https://github.com/MythTV/mythtv.git -b fixes/0.26
> cd mythtv/
> git format-patch v0.26.0
> mv *.patch ..
> git checkout v0.26.0
> patch -p0 < ../0001-*
> Final output is:
> can't find file to patch at input line 17
> (messing with -p do
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> Final output is:
>>> can't find file to patch at input line 17
>>> (messing with -p doesn't help, which will be obvious from a q
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> Final output is:
>> can't find file to patch at input line 17
>> (messing with -p doesn't help, which will be obvious from a quick
>> inspection of the file vs the tree)
>
> Try applying
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I figure this is half-on-topic for this list since I'm trying to
> prepare patch sets for a package. I'm getting fairly bizarre behavior
> from git format-patch - patches that don't apply, and patches numbered
> early in sequence that didn't
On 7/29/2013 20:07, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Dustin C. Hatch wrote:
I think the point is that users may have an initramfs (that they built
manually or using some tool besides dracut or genkernel) that makes use of
cryptsetup/lvm2 built statically, or perhaps they jus
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> go ahead -- note that some packages have broken multilib deps though
Thanks!
> ah, and it wont work if you dont add support to multilib-build.eclass
> also.
Of course :)
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Dustin C. Hatch wrote:
> I think the point is that users may have an initramfs (that they built
> manually or using some tool besides dracut or genkernel) that makes use of
> cryptsetup/lvm2 built statically, or perhaps they just like it that way, so
> why take awa
On 7/29/2013 19:33, Matt Turner wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:28 PM, yac wrote:
I have fully encrypted systems, including /, which requires an
initramfs with cryptsetup built staticaly.
Doesn't it actually require them built statically, or simply that the
necessary libraries are also in th
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 20:40:31 -0400
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:21:15 -0700
> Matt Turner wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Any objections to me adding an ABI_MIPS USE_EXPAND variable so that
> > I can take advantage of the multilib work on mips?
>
> go ahead -- note that some packag
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:21:15 -0700
Matt Turner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any objections to me adding an ABI_MIPS USE_EXPAND variable so that I
> can take advantage of the multilib work on mips?
go ahead -- note that some packages have broken multilib deps though
please add descriptions to abi_mips.desc
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:28 PM, yac wrote:
> I have fully encrypted systems, including /, which requires an
> initramfs with cryptsetup built staticaly.
Doesn't it actually require them built statically, or simply that the
necessary libraries are also in the initramfs?
I think this has already
I have fully encrypted systems, including /, which requires an
initramfs with cryptsetup built staticaly.
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:57:58 +0200
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> As discussed at:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478476
>
> Upstream is dropping static libs from udev and, then
Hi,
Any objections to me adding an ABI_MIPS USE_EXPAND variable so that I
can take advantage of the multilib work on mips?
Thanks,
Matt
I figure this is half-on-topic for this list since I'm trying to
prepare patch sets for a package. I'm getting fairly bizarre behavior
from git format-patch - patches that don't apply, and patches numbered
early in sequence that didn't show up previously in this branch. I
suspect rebasing might b
On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 18:13 +0200, Alex Legler wrote:
> The overlays configuration file repositories.xml is the first file that
> is now being served via api.gentoo.org.
>
> New public URL: https://api.gentoo.org/overlays/repositories.xml
> Git repository: git+ssh://g...@git.gentoo.org/proj/api.gi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 27/07/13 15:32, Manuel Rüger wrote:
> On 07/27/2013 03:28 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
>> Then we might as well just have a Linux package with a bunch of
>> USE flags -- gentoo, hardened, libre, tuxonice, ck, etc.
> This is not a good idea, I'd
El lun, 29-07-2013 a las 17:13 -0400, Rich Freeman escribió:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Grepping in the tree, looks like only some old genkernel versions are
> > depending on it. Apart of that, what is requiring static libs in
> > cryptsetup and lvm2?
>
> This isn't
2. should be nuked from orbit anyway, just curious do someone know any?
2013/7/29 Rich Freeman
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Grepping in the tree, looks like only some old genkernel versions are
> > depending on it. Apart of that, what is requiring static libs in
>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Grepping in the tree, looks like only some old genkernel versions are
> depending on it. Apart of that, what is requiring static libs in
> cryptsetup and lvm2?
This isn't the specific answer you're likely looking for, but the
obvious answers w
Hi,
I just added the license 'bertini' to the non-free group. Bertini is a
math software distributed in source form but with restriction on
redistribution (no fee is allowed, no modifications may be
redisitributed). The way I read clause 2, I think we are allowed to
distribute the source code on
Hello
As discussed at:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478476
Upstream is dropping static libs from udev and, then, sys-apps/udev is
currently reverting that commit downstream (even if upstream says some
problems could appear in the future as nobody is taking care of static
stuff there).
The patch below will make Emacs version detection more robust.
Rationale: Some users symlink /usr/bin/emacs to a microemacs variant.
Depending on the variant, current version detection will exit with an
error, output an empty version, or hang with the editor waiting for
user interaction. The patch
Zac Medico posted on Mon, 29 Jul 2013 01:04:09 -0700 as excerpted:
> On 07/28/2013 05:39 PM, Duncan wrote:
>> [D]epclean now does [an elf-based dynamic deps scan] and will refuse to
>> remove a package [if that turns up a dependency], asking you to
>> rebuild the depending package first to remove
On 07/28/2013 05:39 PM, Duncan wrote:
> I haven't checked the details and depclean does run far faster than
> revdep-rebuild so whatever it's doing isn't as thorough, but depclean now
> does at least some actual on-system checking before removing a package,
> and will refuse to remove a package
29 matches
Mail list logo
