> On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 01:56 PM, Bernard Cafarelli wrote:
>> gnustep-base/gnustep-make has a USE flag (libobjc2) masked globally in
>> base/package.use.mask, and unmasked on specific arches in
>> arch/{amd64,x86}/package.use.mask
>>
>> To get a stabilization
Le Tue, 10 Jan 2017 14:09:07 -0800
Zac Medico a écrit:
> On 01/10/2017 01:56 PM, Bernard Cafarelli wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > gnustep-base/gnustep-make has a USE flag (libobjc2) masked globally in
> > base/package.use.mask, and unmasked on specific arches in
> > arch/{amd64,x86}/package.use.ma
On 01/10/2017 01:56 PM, Bernard Cafarelli wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> gnustep-base/gnustep-make has a USE flag (libobjc2) masked globally in
> base/package.use.mask, and unmasked on specific arches in
> arch/{amd64,x86}/package.use.mask
>
> To get a stabilization (#579232) bug finally moving on, I wan
Our bug queue has 86 bugs!
If you have some spare time, please help assign/sort a few bugs.
To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5
Thanks!
Hi folks,
gnustep-base/gnustep-make has a USE flag (libobjc2) masked globally in
base/package.use.mask, and unmasked on specific arches in
arch/{amd64,x86}/package.use.mask
To get a stabilization (#579232) bug finally moving on, I wanted to
leave this flag out, adding a corresponding line in
base
# NP-Hardass (19 Jan 2017)
# Upstream has discontinued Pipelight and Firefox is in the process
# of removing NPAPI support (which Pipelight relies upon), making
# this obsolete.
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
www-plugins/pipelight
--
NP-Hardass
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital si
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 15:01:15 +0200
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Ühel kenal päeval, T, 10.01.2017 kell 19:19, kirjutas Vadim A. Misbakh-
> Soloviov:
> > that will
> > affect tons of users (which are happy with current "defaults")
> > because yours
> > only own local problems (not having root access on
Hello All,
this message is an update of:
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/4b2ef0e9aa7588224b8ae799c5fe31fa
What is changed in the meantime:
1) All operations on the bugzilla, about the sanity-check and so on are done
with the account stable-...@gentoo.org
So, if you want to filt
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:54:21 +0100
Jan Stary wrote:
> On Jan 09 09:30:11, ike...@gentoo.org wrote:
> > Hiya Jan,
> >
> > The following snippet from Ingo is correct:
> >
> > > So, you want to hear something constructive? Your best option is to
> > > just decompress that stuff on your system.
Ühel kenal päeval, T, 10.01.2017 kell 14:39, kirjutas Ulrich Mueller:
> > > > > > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> > Yes, the default should be changed for everyone.
> > To PORTAGE_COMPRESS="xz".
>
> Back in 2013, vapier had made extensive studies of compression tools
> for man pages an
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Yes, the default should be changed for everyone.
> To PORTAGE_COMPRESS="xz".
Back in 2013, vapier had made extensive studies of compression tools
for man pages and documentation, and the conclusion was that bzip2
gives the best overall compression
On 09-01-2017 09:08:22 +0100, Jan Stary wrote:
> The particular problem I am having is that http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ ,
> my manpage formatter of choice, does deliberately not support bzip
> (or any other outside decompressors for that matter).
Attached patch works for me. XZ should be a similar exer
Ühel kenal päeval, T, 10.01.2017 kell 19:19, kirjutas Vadim A. Misbakh-
Soloviov:
> that will
> affect tons of users (which are happy with current "defaults")
> because yours
> only own local problems (not having root access on the system)?
Yes, the default should be changed for everyone.
To POR
On Jan 10 19:19:03, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> В письме от вторник, 10 января 2017 г. 13:08:14 +07 пользователь Jan Stary
> написал:
> > On Jan 10 19:04:47, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> > > > There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> > > > or there are untracked files; the man
В письме от вторник, 10 января 2017 г. 13:08:14 +07 пользователь Jan Stary
написал:
> On Jan 10 19:04:47, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> > > There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> > > or there are untracked files; the manpage formatter needs to call
> > > external unpackers
On Jan 10 19:04:47, gen...@mva.name wrote:
> > There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> > or there are untracked files; the manpage formatter needs to call
> > external unpackers. All this to save 40M. I honestly don't think
> > it's worth it.
>
> Why do you care about
> > This is Gentoo 2.2 (4.4.6-gentoo x86_64).
>
> That doesn't actually tell any Gentoo user anything about your system
> except a very specific few bits of data which do not relate at all to
> the rest of the subject matter of your e-mail.
I am not really familiar eith this system - what would b
> There is an option to support; the packages need to be reinstalled
> or there are untracked files; the manpage formatter needs to call
> external unpackers. All this to save 40M. I honestly don't think
> it's worth it.
Why do you care about calling external unpacker, but do not care about saving
On Jan 10 12:54:21, h...@stare.cz wrote:
> Also, the uncompressed manpage will not get updated
> when the packages gets updated. I will have two copies,
> a stale *.1 and an up-to-date *.1.bz2.
And things like /usr/share/man/man1/sx.1.bz2
will not get unbzipped, because it's a symlink, now broken.
On Jan 09 09:30:11, ike...@gentoo.org wrote:
> Hiya Jan,
>
> The following snippet from Ingo is correct:
>
> > So, you want to hear something constructive? Your best option is to
> > just decompress that stuff on your system. (Gentoo is famous for
> > its excessive configurability - maybe there
20 matches
Mail list logo
