On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:58:15 +
hasufell wrote:
> I want to keep the over-long description unless we have some sort of
> ebuild aliases.
jer
# Andreas K. Huettel (27 Oct 2014)
# Multiple QA issues (#344187, #319433, #317575, #174466)
# no upstream releases for a long time.
# Masked for removal in 30 days
mail-filter/spamassassin-fuzzyocr
(ack'ed by chutzpah)
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
htt
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 09:04:19PM +, Howard Chu wrote:
> Robin H. Johnson (robbat2) wrote:
> > robbat2 14/10/27 19:15:09
> >
> >Removed: openldap-2.4.40-db-6.patch
> >Log:
> >Upstream OpenLDAP nixes bdb6 functionality.
> Not entirely accurate. We didn't nix all of
Patrick Lauer (patrick):
> patrick 14/10/27 02:58:21
>
> Modified: stone-soup-0.14.1.ebuild
> stone-soup-0.15.1-r1.ebuild
> stone-soup-0.15.1.ebuild stone-soup-0.13.2.ebuild
> stone-soup-0.14.2.ebuild ChangeL
> - libcxxabi is probably the new way to go instead of libcxxrt; last
> time I checked there was a chicken and egg problem: libcxxabi needed
> clang + libc++ to build, so bootstrapping the stack was a bit
> painful.
I give libcxxabi a try.
Does anybody has a bit insight in the current stat
Am 27. Oct 2014, 12:07 schrieb "M. Ziebell" :
> Does clang compile glibc already?
> At the last GNU Cauldron the speaker said that clang fails because
> of:[1]
> - nested functions
> - VLAIS
>
> How did you avoid that problem?
Even without this issues there remains the fact that glibc is quite
c
Am 27. Oct 2014, 11:14 schrieb Alexis Ballier :
> By the way, any help for maintaining the libc++ stack is very welcome;
> as you can see from the age of the current snapshots, it's been some
> time I've not been playing with it.
>
>
> Some notes:
> - why not adding a clang subprofile ? there's o
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:29:40 +0100
"M. Ziebell" wrote:
> Am Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:10:51 +0100
> schrieb Alexis Ballier :
>
> > On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:07:25 +0100
> > "M. Ziebell" wrote:
> >
> > > Does clang compile glibc already?
> > > At the last GNU Cauldron the speaker said that clang fails b
Am Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:10:51 +0100
schrieb Alexis Ballier :
> On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:07:25 +0100
> "M. Ziebell" wrote:
>
> > Does clang compile glibc already?
> > At the last GNU Cauldron the speaker said that clang fails because
> > of:[1]
> > - nested functions
> > - VLAIS
> >
> > How did yo
On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:07:25 +0100
"M. Ziebell" wrote:
> Does clang compile glibc already?
> At the last GNU Cauldron the speaker said that clang fails because
> of:[1]
> - nested functions
> - VLAIS
>
> How did you avoid that problem?
by using freebsd's libc :)
only problem I can recall is
Does clang compile glibc already?
At the last GNU Cauldron the speaker said that clang fails because
of:[1]
- nested functions
- VLAIS
How did you avoid that problem?
Marco
[1]
http://www.youtube.ca/watch?v=mmiDwKgn6Ho&list=PLOGTP9W1DX5U53pPxtWdKkyiqe3GAn6Nd
Am Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:20:00 +0100
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> - why not adding a clang subprofile ? there's one for amd64-fbsd; I had
> been able to build a complete stage 3 without too much trouble.
> There's probably nothing bsd specific there, so moving
> generic code from there to profiles/features should work.
I'd try to te
By the way, any help for maintaining the libc++ stack is very welcome;
as you can see from the age of the current snapshots, it's been some
time I've not been playing with it.
Some notes:
- why not adding a clang subprofile ? there's one for amd64-fbsd; I had
been able to build a complete stage
13 matches
Mail list logo
