2017-10-13 4:05 GMT+02:00 M. J. Everitt :
> On 12/10/17 22:24, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > FEATURES=splitdebug at the moment require package dev-util/debugedit
> > which is a lagging behind upstream.
> > However package app-arch/rpm (from which debugedit is forked) always
> > instal
Andreas K. Huettel posted on Fri, 13 Oct 2017 00:51:23 +0200 as excerpted:
> Am Mittwoch, 11. Oktober 2017, 06:24:44 CEST schrieb Alec Warner:
>>
>> "Please upgrade away from the 13.0 profiles in the next six weeks."
>>
>>
> Good idea. Here's what I wrote:
>
> Please upgrade away from the 13.0
On 12/10/17 22:24, Francesco Riosa wrote:
> hi,
>
> FEATURES=splitdebug at the moment require package dev-util/debugedit
> which is a lagging behind upstream.
> However package app-arch/rpm (from which debugedit is forked) always
> install the same binary in ${ROOT}/usr/libexec/rpm/debugedit.
>
Am Mittwoch, 11. Oktober 2017, 18:45:37 CEST schrieb Robin H. Johnson:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 08:10:02AM -0400, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
> > Some of these can take a while. Maybe we want to spell it out:
> >
> > for p in sys-devel/gcc:6.4.0 sys-devel/binutils sys-libs/glibc; do
> > emerge -1 $p
Am Mittwoch, 11. Oktober 2017, 06:41:06 CEST schrieb Walter Dnes:
>
> 1) Will 6.3.0 be skipped for stabilization?
Yes.
(Actually I'd prefer to drop it yesterday, but didn't manage to wake up enough
toolchain team members for that.)
>
> 2) If someone decides to override and set "-pie" in USE,
Am Mittwoch, 11. Oktober 2017, 06:24:44 CEST schrieb Alec Warner:
>
> "Please upgrade away from the 13.0 profiles in the next six weeks."
>
Good idea. Here's what I wrote:
Please upgrade away from the 13.0 profiles within the six weeks after
GCC 6.4.0 has been stabilized on your architecture. T
hi,
FEATURES=splitdebug at the moment require package dev-util/debugedit
which is a lagging behind upstream.
However package app-arch/rpm (from which debugedit is forked) always
install the same binary in ${ROOT}/usr/libexec/rpm/debugedit.
In 2017 I don't see much value in maintaining a fork
All,
if there are no objections to this, I would like to publish the newsitem
tomorrow and release OpenRC 0.33 at the same time.
If I do not see any responses by 24 hours from now I will do so.
Thanks,
William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
All,
OpenRC 0.33 will remove the "service" binary, which is currently a copy
of the "rc-service" binary. The reason for this is that "service" will
be provided by sys-apps/init-system-helpers.
Here is the news item:
Thanks,
William
Title: OpenRC "service" binary removal
Author: William Hubbs
On Sun, 01 Oct 2017 09:02:19 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu sob, 30.09.2017 o godzinie 21∶49 +, użytkownik Robin H.
> Johnson napisał:
> > On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 08:05:50PM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > > Am Samstag, 30. September 2017, 19:03:59 CEST schrieb Keri Harris:
> > >
Kent Fredric posted on Thu, 12 Oct 2017 05:20:24 +1300 as excerpted:
> This is especially annoying as:
>
> 1. Its very easy to overlook one package in a 400 package depclean
> notice.
Wow. How'd you ever get a backlog of 400 packages in your depclean list,
including critical ones you know you
Duncan posted on Wed, 11 Oct 2017 03:31:55 + as excerpted:
> Andreas K. Huettel posted on Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:02:32 +0200 as
> excerpted:
>
>> Switching the profile changes the settings for building gcc (it
>> switches a use-flag from forced-off to forced-on). A gcc-6 built with
>> the 17.0 p
W dniu śro, 11.10.2017 o godzinie 18∶33 -0400, użytkownik Mike Pagano
napisał:
> On 10/11/2017 05:19 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> snip
>
> > - ``Reported-by: Full Name `` — usually indicates
> > full review,
>
> snip
>
> Hi,
>
> Is that was Reported-by usually indicates? I use it
13 matches
Mail list logo
