Dnia 2014-07-28, o godz. 13:02:39
Ian Stakenvicius napisał(a):
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 28/07/14 07:21 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2014-07-25, o godz. 14:49:44 Ian Stakenvicius
> > napisał(a):
> >
> >> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a me
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 28/07/14 07:21 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Dnia 2014-07-25, o godz. 14:49:44 Ian Stakenvicius
>> napisał(a):
>>
>>> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this
>>>
Denis Dupeyron posted on Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:15:20 -0600 as excerpted:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen
> wrote:
>> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
>> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>> x265-.ebuild: KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>>
>> As in... You for
On 28/07/14 08:15 PM, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen
> wrote:
>> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
>> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>> x265-.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>>
>> As in... You forgot to add ~arm to -.e
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> x265-1.2.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~arm ~x86"
> x265-1.3.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
> x265-.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~amd64 ~x86"
>
> As in... You forgot to add ~arm to -.ebuild
Wait, what? Live ebuilds are keyworded now?
De
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 11:02:58 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 28/07/14 09:41, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > On 27/07/14 22:01, Markus Meier (maekke) wrote:
> >> maekke 14/07/27 19:01:15
> >>
> >> Modified: x265-1.0.ebuild ChangeLog x265-1.2.ebuild
> >>
Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> Keeping every single dependency around and valid just so that pkg_*rm
> can completely cleanly seems like so much overkill, though..
It is not only overkill, it would require a merging strategy which
AFAIK portage currently does not use and which would lead to blockers
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Martin Vaeth wrote:
>
> In both cases of 6., the user is not even aware that he uses
> long obsolete packages unless portage prints a big fat warning
> for orphaned packages (which currently is not the case.
> Well, at least eix -t will be print a message.)
>
This
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Martin Vaeth wrote:
>> > The user's vardb could then automatically receive the last state of
>> > the ebuild, before it was removed.
>>
>> It doesn't help reliably, either, since the last state of the ebuild,
>> before it was removed, will be outdated at some point, too.
>
> S
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> The primary underlying problem I see about this is that it doesn't
> force devs to start doing something to the tree that will suddenly
> help make all of the static-deps-only PMs (ie, those that aren't going
> to implement this new hash
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 27/07/14 08:04 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Kent Fredric
> wrote:
>>
>> In a "no dynamic deps, period" scenario, this just strikes me as
>> 2 flavours of the same weirdness, -r2 and -r1.1 are just equally
>> weird c
> "AX" == Alex Xu writes:
AX> Please don't crosspost followup messages, especially to the same mailing
AX> list twice.
Ick. I didn't notice the cc details when I replied. ☹
-JimC
--
James Cloos OpenPGP: 0x997A9F17ED7DAEA6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 28/07/14 07:21 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-07-25, o godz. 14:49:44 Ian Stakenvicius
> napisał(a):
>
>> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this
>> would be to implement in the virtuals' ebuilds themselves, what
>> do
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> As has been mentioned or alluded to before, this is fine as long as
> end-users --sync when the dependency change is still in the tree.
> However, if that doesn't happen then we still end up with the issue.
>
> Of course, if that is the c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 27/07/14 05:08 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Michał Górny
> wrote:
>> Dnia 2014-07-27, o godz. 10:42:19
>>
>> Consider the following:
>>
>> 1. A depends on B, both are installed,
>>
>> 2. dependency on B is removed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 28/07/14 10:43 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:30:15 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius
> wrote:
>> On 26/07/14 11:22 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>>
>>> Let's start with the easiest issue: please point us all to the
>>> place where you
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 05:49:07 + (UTC)
Martin Vaeth wrote:
> hasufell wrote:
> > Ulrich Mueller:
> >>
> >> I wonder if it wouldn't be saner to leave our revision syntax
> >> untouched.
>
> As already mentioned, -r1.1 is only one of several possible ways
> how to achieve the same aim; I am not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 28/07/14 10:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-07-28, o godz. 10:20:44 Ian Stakenvicius
> napisał(a):
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>>
>> On 26/07/14 10:40 AM, Manuel Rüger wrote:
>>> On 07/25/2014 08:49 PM, Ian Stake
On Mon, 28 Jul 2014 10:30:15 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 26/07/14 11:22 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >
> > Let's start with the easiest issue: please point us all to the
> > place where you "proved" how dynamic dependencies still work in the
> > face of ebuild removals. Your solution to th
Dnia 2014-07-28, o godz. 10:20:44
Ian Stakenvicius napisał(a):
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 26/07/14 10:40 AM, Manuel Rüger wrote:
> > On 07/25/2014 08:49 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> >> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this
> >> would be to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 26/07/14 11:22 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> Let's start with the easiest issue: please point us all to the
> place where you "proved" how dynamic dependencies still work in the
> face of ebuild removals. Your solution to this problem will be of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 26/07/14 10:40 AM, Manuel Rüger wrote:
> On 07/25/2014 08:49 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this
>> would be to implement in the virtuals' ebuilds themselves, what
>> do people think of chang
Martin Vaeth wrote:
> > The user's vardb could then automatically receive the last state of
> > the ebuild, before it was removed.
>
> It doesn't help reliably, either, since the last state of the ebuild,
> before it was removed, will be outdated at some point, too.
Sorry, I don't see how. Can yo
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Martin Vaeth wrote:
>> In fact, no matter whether you have static or dynamic deps, this is
>> the only way to cleanly avoid the problems if you want to keep a
>> package installed which is not maintained anymore:
>> *You* must maintain it. There simply is no magic which can av
Dnia 2014-07-25, o godz. 14:49:44
Ian Stakenvicius napisał(a):
> Hey all.. So, putting aside for now how much of a mess this would be
> to implement in the virtuals' ebuilds themselves, what do people think
> of changing the virtuals so that they contain an entry in IUSE for
> each provider that
Martin Vaeth wrote:
> The user has to put a corrected ebuild into his overlay and must
> reemerge the package (currently, the latter could be skipped with
> dynamic deps).
> In fact, no matter whether you have static or dynamic deps, this is
> the only way to cleanly avoid the problems if you want
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> 1) Foo incorrectly deps on bar
> 2) User installs foo with the incorrect dep
> 3) Foo maintainer detects the error
> 4) Due to dynamic-deps, portage depcleans bar.
> 5) Since nothing in the tree needs bar, it is removed.
> 6) Finally, foo is removed from tre
El lun, 28-07-2014 a las 09:38 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 27/07/14 14:33, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > # Pacho Ramos (27 Jul 2014)
> > # Not buildable for a long time, bug #414903
> > # Removal in a month.
> > media-plugins/vdr-dxr3
> > media-video/dxr3config
> > media-video/em8300-libraries
On 28/07/14 09:38, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 27/07/14 14:33, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>> # Pacho Ramos (27 Jul 2014)
>> # Not buildable for a long time, bug #414903
>> # Removal in a month.
>> media-plugins/vdr-dxr3
>> media-video/dxr3config
>> media-video/em8300-libraries
> You forgot to mask em8300
On 28/07/14 09:41, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 27/07/14 22:01, Markus Meier (maekke) wrote:
>> maekke 14/07/27 19:01:15
>>
>> Modified: x265-1.0.ebuild ChangeLog x265-1.2.ebuild
>> x265-0.8.ebuild
>> Log:
>> add ~arm, bug #510340
> Package bumping is
Paweł Hajdan, Jr. posted on Sun, 27 Jul 2014 16:56:17 +0200 as excerpted:
>> One thing I would question in that table is "applied immediately (but
>> can break hard when dynamic-deps stop working))." How can dynamically
>> removing an "unused dependency" cause something to break, setting aside
>>
31 matches
Mail list logo
