Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/811504
Signed-off-by: Sam James
Signed-off-by: Arthur Zamarin
---
...ptools_scm-6_3_0-temporary-breakage.en.txt | 49 +++
1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
create mode 100644
2021-09-03-setuptools_scm-6_3_0-temporary-breakage/2021-09-03-setuptools_sc
Hello All,
What do you think about converting pkg overlay into an operational local
overlay
that has the same meaning for the portage as all the local overlays are?
I understand that at a distant point in time some of the kept packages in this
overlay will
not be supported by the current port
On 30/08/2021 13:37, Jakov Smolić wrote:
On 8/30/21 10:39 AM, Lars Wendler wrote:
Hi,
the following packages are up for grabs:
app-emulation/sen (3 open bugs)
dev-python/flexmock
sys-process/nmon (2 open bugs)
x11-wm/i3
I can take i3. If anybody else is interested feel free to join in.
I'l
On 3.9.2021 12.58, Ionen Wolkens wrote:
> Some of you may already know about it but, now that it has been tested
> a bit more, felt should advertise here.
>
> It's small'ish scripts available from "app-portage/iwdevtools"
>
> See github[1]'s README.rst for a lowdown (and --help or man pages for
>
Thanks to Sam, mgorny and Ulm for the review.
Incorporated all requested changes
Support the possibility that the Makefile could be
one of the following and should be checked in
the order described here:
https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html
Order of checking and valid Makefiles n
Some of you may already know about it but, now that it has been tested
a bit more, felt should advertise here.
It's small'ish scripts available from "app-portage/iwdevtools"
See github[1]'s README.rst for a lowdown (and --help or man pages for
options), but for a quick overview:
qa-vdb:
Look
> On Fri, 03 Sep 2021, Mike wrote:
> - if [ ! -s "${KV_DIR}/Makefile" ]
> + get_makefile
> +
> + if [[ ! -s "${KERNEL_MAKEFILE}" ]]
No quotation marks needed in [[ ]].
+ [[ -s "${KV_DIR}"/GNUMakefile ]] &&
> KERNEL_MAKEFILE="${KV_DIR}/GNUMakefile"
> + [[ -s "${KV_DIR}"
On Thu, 2021-09-02 at 19:28 -0400, Mike wrote:
> Support the possibility that the Makefile could be
> one of the following and should be checked in the order described here:
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html
>
> Order of checking and valid Makefiles names:
> GNUMakefile, make
