On 14/11/14 15:01, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Palimaka
> wrote:
>> On 14/11/14 11:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> Well, the idea would be to maintain the virtual INSTEAD of @system, or
>>> have @system just pull in the virtual and make some arch-specific
>>> ad
i'm interested on sys-apps/epoch, if no one takes it
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Hello all
>
> Due to lack of time I'm giving up some packages. Feel free to take them:
>
> app-admin/ec2-ami-tools
> app-admin/ec2-api-tools
> These command-
Mike Gilbert posted on Fri, 14 Nov 2014 15:55:10 -0500 as excerpted:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Alexander Hof
> wrote:
>> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Michael Palimaka
>>> wrote:
On 14/11/14 01:05, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> Isn't it possible to disab
hasufell wrote:
>> Are we talking about forcing +cxx globally or for gcc (+toolchain)?
>>
>> Has this been a major problem in the past? Shouldn't people who set
>> USE="-*" also "know what they are doing"?
>>
>
> * don't ever assume that the user knows what he is doing
> * still allow him to brea
On 11/14/2014 11:42 PM, Alexander Hof wrote:
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>> There are people that don't want c++ and gcc:4.7 can still bootstrap
>>> without.
>>>
>>
>> Those people "know what they are doing" and could un-force the use
>> flag. That would prevent people from accidentally disabling it via
Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> There are people that don't want c++ and gcc:4.7 can still bootstrap
>> without.
>>
>
> Those people "know what they are doing" and could un-force the use
> flag. That would prevent people from accidentally disabling it via
> USE="-*".
Are we talking about forcing +cxx glob
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Alexander Hof wrote:
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Michael Palimaka
>> wrote:
>>> On 14/11/14 01:05, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
>>>
>>> It is, but I think if that's disabled yo
El vie, 14-11-2014 a las 19:23 +, Ciaran McCreesh escribió:
[...]
> It *also* isn't an issue on any other source based distribution. This
> is entirely down to Gentoo libstdc++ silliness.
>
> > However, the right way to do this isn't to toggle some global setting
> > - it is to just apply spec
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 10:03:27 -0800 Zac Medico wrote:
[...]
> >> Sorry Zac, I posted my reply before I read this. This is essentially
> >> the point I was making. However, I think this will be cumbersome. With
> >> the current way we do things, its easy to delete packages from @system
> >> by
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 14:17:12 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500
> > Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> >> Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compilers, compile
> >> systemd, and then switch back?
> >
> > Thi
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500
> Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compilers, compile systemd,
>> and then switch back?
>
> This will horrifically break things like Portage's parallel build...
>
> No
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 10/17/2014 09:43 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/17/14 14:55, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512
>>
>> On 10/07/2014 01:00 AM, Patrick McLean wrote:
>>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 19:25:53 -0400 "Anthony G. Ba
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500
Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compilers, compile systemd,
> and then switch back?
This will horrifically break things like Portage's parallel build...
Note that on every distribution except Gentoo, there are no problems
wi
On 11/14/2014 06:58 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-11-14, o godz. 09:08:17
> Michael Orlitzky napisał(a):
>
>> On 11/13/2014 10:17 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>
Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
>>>
>>> It is.. but unfortunately there's no way in DEPEND to ensur
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 16:50:24 +0100 Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Freitag, 14. November 2014, 15:49:17 schrieb Andrew Savchenko:
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > > Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compilers, compile systemd,
> > > and then switch back?
>
On 11/14/2014 06:14 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 07:20:50 -0500 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>> On 11/13/14 23:15, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> On 11/13/2014 08:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Palimaka
wrote:
> On 14/11/14 11:06
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 14/11/14 10:50 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Freitag, 14. November 2014, 15:49:17 schrieb Andrew Savchenko:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compil
Am Freitag, 14. November 2014, 15:49:17 schrieb Andrew Savchenko:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> >
> > Question 1: is it desirable to e.g. switch compilers, compile systemd,
> > and then switch back?
>
> This is definitely a good idea. Some packages are p
Dnia 2014-11-14, o godz. 09:08:17
Michael Orlitzky napisał(a):
> On 11/13/2014 10:17 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> >> Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
> >
> > It is.. but unfortunately there's no way in DEPEND to ensure it's
> > satisfied, as you can have a gcc instal
Hi,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:08:17 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 11/13/2014 10:17 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> >> Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
> >
> > It is.. but unfortunately there's no way in DEPEND to ensure it's
> > satisfied, as you can have a gcc install
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 09:10:43 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 11/13/2014 01:13 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Michael Palimaka
> > wrote:
> >> On 14/11/14 01:05, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> >>> Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
> >>
> >> It is,
Hi,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014 07:20:50 -0500 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 11/13/14 23:15, Zac Medico wrote:
> > On 11/13/2014 08:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Palimaka
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 14/11/14 11:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Well, the idea would be to
On 11/13/2014 01:13 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Michael Palimaka
> wrote:
>> On 14/11/14 01:05, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>>> Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
>>
>> It is, but I think if that's disabled you're on your own. :-)
>
> Perhaps we s
On 11/13/2014 10:17 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> Isn't it possible to disable C++ in GCC with USE="-cxx"?
>
> It is.. but unfortunately there's no way in DEPEND to ensure it's
> satisfied, as you can have a gcc installed with that flag enabled but
> have a second one (that's actually selected
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>
> Sorry Zac, I posted my reply before I read this. This is essentially the
> point I was making. However, I think this will be cumbersome. With the
> current way we do things, its easy to delete packages from @system by just
> doing '-
On 11/13/14 23:15, Zac Medico wrote:
On 11/13/2014 08:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote:
On 14/11/14 11:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
Well, the idea would be to maintain the virtual INSTEAD of @system, or
have @system just pull in the virtual and mak
On 11/13/14 21:38, Michael Palimaka wrote:
On 14/11/14 11:06, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Michael Palimaka
wrote:
Ditching implicit dependencies is an interesting idea but not practical.
Nobody wants to the laundry list, and there's little benefit in
maintaining a vir
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> dev-python/markups
> A wrapper around various text markups
The python team can take this one.
Cheers,
Dirkjan
28 matches
Mail list logo
