On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:38:04 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions
> in their ebuilds. [...] What should I do to them?
File a bug report. Don't do anything "to" anyone.
jer
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 07:04:44PM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?full=1
> No idea, I'm fairly new and learned this as part of the quiz.
>
> [1], 3.h. Mailing lists, second paragraph; I quote for you:
> > If you send a message to dev-an
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:06:40 +
"Robin H. Johnson" wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:56:51AM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > Seems like a bug with g-d-a because the mail header has not changed.
> > The mail itself is proper, nothing wrong with it; the Reply-To
> > header should not matter with
just to be clear: I prefer the 1st patch but I would give the variable
(COMPLETE_MULTILIB) a more private name and document this is only for
multilib-portage and it will not work with regular portage.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 11:56:51AM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Seems like a bug with g-d-a because the mail header has not changed.
> The mail itself is proper, nothing wrong with it; the Reply-To header
> should not matter with regards to delivery. We might even risk not
> receiving them if we sen
On Sun, 25 Aug 2013 16:15:31 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > first version (multilib1.patch) directly changes the output of the
> > currently used multilib_is_native_abi() function:
>
> I think this would be very misleading. If a function is called
> multilib_is_native_abi then it should test for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 25/08/13 10:30 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-25, o godz. 16:15:31 Ulrich Mueller
> napisał(a):
>
>>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, Thomas Sachau wrote:
>>
>>> first version (multilib1.patch) directly changes the output of
>>> the currently
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 25/08/13 10:15 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sun, 25 Aug 2013, Thomas Sachau wrote:
>
>> workaround: add a variable, which changes the return of the
>> function checking for the current ABI (always true with variable,
>> without only true,
On 08/26/2013 09:19 AM, Devan Franchini (twitch153) wrote:
>
> -src_prepare() {
> +pkg_pretend() {
> +
> + local ver=4.6.0
> + local msg="${PN} needs at least GCC ${ver} set to compile."
> +
> + if ! version_is_at_least ${ver} $(gcc-fullversion); then
> + eerror ${msg}
> +
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:38 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions
> in their ebuilds. I mean, functions that are explicitly marked
> @INTERNAL and that start with an underscore. What should I do to them?
Seems crazy to need a written policy t
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 11:22:35 +0200
Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
> On Monday, August 26, 2013 00:25:01 Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or
> > removed from the tree, for the week ending 2013-08-25 23h59 UTC.
>
> These mails are not going through
On Monday, August 26, 2013 00:25:01 Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
> from the tree, for the week ending 2013-08-25 23h59 UTC.
These mails are not going through gentoo-dev-announce any more, I suppose
because they don't have proper
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:38:04 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions
> in their ebuilds. I mean, functions that are explicitly marked
> @INTERNAL and that start with an underscore. What should I do to them?
First, figure out why they use the
On 26 August 2013 19:55, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El lun, 26-08-2013 a las 09:38 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
>
>
> I would open a bug and try to contact the developer. Not sure if
> internal functions could be named in a "standard" way allowing repoman
> to die on its usage by ebuilds :/
>
>
This r
On 26 August 2013 19:38, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello, all.
>
> I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions
> in their ebuilds. I mean, functions that are explicitly marked
> @INTERNAL and that start with an underscore. What should I do to them?
>
>
Not sure if this is a warn
El lun, 26-08-2013 a las 09:38 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> Hello, all.
>
> I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions
> in their ebuilds. I mean, functions that are explicitly marked
> @INTERNAL and that start with an underscore. What should I do to them?
>
> I would ex
Hello, all.
I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions
in their ebuilds. I mean, functions that are explicitly marked
@INTERNAL and that start with an underscore. What should I do to them?
I would expect that Gentoo developers are professionals. Or at least
semi-reasonable
17 matches
Mail list logo
