On Sat, 2017-08-12 at 05:58 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> I simply overlooked the global USE change in make.conf because IMO
> it's
> a nonsense operation.
This also happens routinely as new python and ruby versions are marked
stable, not via make.conf, but by removing their use.stable.mask
Michael Orlitzky posted on Sat, 12 Aug 2017 05:58:41 -0400 as excerpted:
> On 08/12/2017 04:39 AM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
>
>> There are use-cases for --changed-use / --newuse other than changed
>> IUSE.
>>
>> I find it useful to easily rebuild affected packages when changing USE
>> flags in m
Michael Orlitzky posted on Sat, 12 Aug 2017 10:14:18 -0400 as excerpted:
> On 08/12/2017 06:29 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> My gut feeling is that the change you want is probably a good thing,
>> but it will never happen if you can't provide a single example of
>> something bad happening due to
The out-of-source.eclass is a simple multilib-minimal-style wrapper
to perform out of source builds of autotools (and other) packages. It is
mostly derived from the function served in the past by autotools-utils
since a number of developers found it useful. However, in order to avoid
the mistakes o
On śro, 2017-08-02 at 17:58 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I've finally gotten around to writing a new tool for migrating amd64
> systems to SYMLINK_LIB=no layout [1]. I've put it in symlink-lib-
> migration [2] repository along with a README. Please review it and give
> it more te
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Alexander Berntsen
wrote:
> While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's still a
> good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to see the
> proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo.
>
Also, how many Portages are there tha
While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's still a
good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to see the
proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo.
--
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
signature.asc
Description: OpenPG
On 08/12/2017 06:29 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> My gut feeling is that the change you want is probably a good thing,
> but it will never happen if you can't provide a single example of
> something bad happening due to the lack of a revbump.
There's an unfixed security vulnerability with USE=foo,
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 08/12/2017 08:29 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>>> On 08/12/2017 03:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Please provide some examples of recent in-place USE changes that benefit
>>>
On 08/12/2017 08:29 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> On 08/12/2017 03:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>
>>> Please provide some examples of recent in-place USE changes that benefit
>>> from revbumps.
>>>
>>
>> There is no single example. Things onl
On 08/12/2017 08:16 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 08/12/2017 12:22 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote:
>>
>>> Q. But what if I maintain firefox, and I need to change IUSE?
>>>
>>> If the IUSE change isn't important, just make the new revision in a
>>> branch and wait to commit it later when there a
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 12:22 AM, Michael Palimaka
wrote:
> On 08/12/2017 09:50 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> Q. But what about the rebuilds?
>>
>> For most packages, the rebuilds simply don't matter. Unless you're
>> the maintainer of libreoffice, firefox, chromium, etc. -- just do the
>>
On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 08/12/2017 03:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
>> Please provide some examples of recent in-place USE changes that benefit
>> from revbumps.
>>
>
> There is no single example. Things only get simpler if *all* USE changes
> come with a new
On 08/12/2017 12:22 AM, Michael Palimaka wrote:
>
>> Q. But what if I maintain firefox, and I need to change IUSE?
>>
>> If the IUSE change isn't important, just make the new revision in a
>> branch and wait to commit it later when there are more changes
>> piled up. If it is important (lik
On 08/12/2017 11:57 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> There is no single example. Things only get simpler if *all* USE changes
> come with a new revision.
IMO every significant(*) change should yield into a revision bump.
(*) == comments and echo arguments changes are not significantly, all
others
On 08/12/2017 04:39 AM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote:
>>
>> The option is the same as --newuse except it ignores functionality that
>> you suggest to remove. You could certainly deprecate one option or the
>> other if they became the same. But the core functionality of
>> system-wide USE changes (by p
On 08/12/2017 03:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Please provide some examples of recent in-place USE changes that benefit
> from revbumps.
>
There is no single example. Things only get simpler if *all* USE changes
come with a new revision.
On 12/08/2017 03:11, Brian Evans wrote:
> --changed-use (-U)
>Tells emerge to include installed packages where USE flags have
>changed since installation. This option also implies the
>--selective option. Unlike --newuse, the --changed-use option
>does not
On pią, 2017-08-11 at 16:56 -0700, Gerogy Yakovlev wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was able to test this one a bit.
> The test subjects were:
> ~amd64/openrc/desktop system which I was going to wipe anyway.
> amd64/openrc latest snapshot, updated to ~amd64 with boostrtap.sh
>
> for the latter symlink migrat
On pią, 2017-08-11 at 19:50 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> We have a pull request for the devmanual that will update the revision
> documentation; namely, when to create a new one:
>
> https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org/pull/67
>
> The comments bring up an issue that I think can b
20 matches
Mail list logo
