On Thu, 2020-03-19 at 12:17 -0500, Gordon Pettey wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:47 AM Alec Warner wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 6:52 AM Gerion Entrup
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Am Donnerstag, 19. März 2020, 02:59:56 CET schrieb Kent Fredric:
> > > > On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:52:25 +
> > >
On 2020-03-19 04:03, Kent Fredric wrote:
> Because that experiment basically failed.
>
> Bugs with that flag, basically were treated (repeatedly) like that flag
> wasn't there.
Hehe, maybe because of missing tooling. Common tools like tatt don't
understand "ALLARCHES" :)
--
Regards,
Thomas Deu
This function was never meant to be a part of the public API. Correct
the mistake by renaming it to _python_wrapper_setup(), and adding a QA
warning under the old name.
Signed-off-by: Michał Górny
---
eclass/python-any-r1.eclass| 8
eclass/python-r1.eclass| 4 ++--
eclass
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 9:59 PM Kent Fredric wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:52:25 +
> James Le Cuirot wrote:
>
> > Not quite. Tools like repoman will need to be updated to understand
> > that an ebuild with KEYWORDS="amd64" can depend on another ebuild with
> > only KEYWORDS="noarch". I do
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 14:52:08 +0100
Gerion Entrup wrote:
> Maybe I misunderstand something but shouldn't that be the normal case?
> Every single Python package (candidates for noarch) for example depends
> on the Python interpreter, which must have non noarch keywords.
Yeah. So Basically, this p
# Michał Górny (2020-03-19)
# Unmaintained. Added in 2014 and not touched since. Python 2 only.
# Removal in 30 days. Bug #713506.
net-ftp/pybootd
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:47 AM Alec Warner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 6:52 AM Gerion Entrup
> wrote:
>
>> Am Donnerstag, 19. März 2020, 02:59:56 CET schrieb Kent Fredric:
>> > On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:52:25 +
>> > James Le Cuirot wrote:
>> >
>> > > Not quite. Tools like repoman will ne
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 6:52 AM Gerion Entrup
wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 19. März 2020, 02:59:56 CET schrieb Kent Fredric:
> > On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:52:25 +
> > James Le Cuirot wrote:
> >
> > > Not quite. Tools like repoman will need to be updated to understand
> > > that an ebuild with KEYWOR
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 9:41 AM Mart Raudsepp wrote:
>
> Ühel kenal päeval, K, 18.03.2020 kell 16:43, kirjutas Mike Gilbert:
> > Seems good to me in principle, but I'm not sure it is something we
> > > should do until we haven't promoted this into a global USE flag.
> >
> > An alternative would be
Am Donnerstag, 19. März 2020, 02:59:56 CET schrieb Kent Fredric:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 17:52:25 +
> James Le Cuirot wrote:
>
> > Not quite. Tools like repoman will need to be updated to understand
> > that an ebuild with KEYWORDS="amd64" can depend on another ebuild with
> > only KEYWORDS="no
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 18.03.2020 kell 16:43, kirjutas Mike Gilbert:
> Seems good to me in principle, but I'm not sure it is something we
> > should do until we haven't promoted this into a global USE flag.
>
> An alternative would be to add entries in package.use.
Yeah, that'd be what it is now,
On 3/18/20 10:54 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> So, my question is, why can't we add a noarch/~noarch keyword and see
> how things go? If it gets abused we can always nuke it later.
>
This is a good goal, but as others have pointed out, adding a new magic
keyword poses some workflow problems.
We
Hanno's previous message about the LXDE project made me think other
desktop projects that are facing a bad state in Gentoo: Cinnamon and
Mate. They are both outdated and last I tried, Cinnamon didn't even
build for me (bug open for a ~year now).
https://repology.org/maintainer/cinnamon%40gentoo.
Hello,
I've been the only member of the lxde project for a while.
I recently stopped using lxde myself.
Currently lxde still works, the bug count is relatively low, but it's a
challenging situation. Upstream development has largely stopped and
people have moved to lxqt.
My personal issue why I
On Thu, 2020-03-19 at 14:57 +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 11:59:25 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > Sure, but if you run into something like that you just don't use the
> > noarch keyword for those packages.
>
> But as soon as this happens, all dependent packages that are
# Hans de Graaff (2020-03-19)
# Masked for security issues, bug #699840
# No reverse dependencies. Use dev-ruby/haml:5 instead.
# Removal in 30 days.
dev-ruby/haml:4
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
16 matches
Mail list logo
