Re: [gentoo-dev] moving gcc-5.2 to unstable

On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 10:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On 01 Oct 2015 10:11, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 09:49 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > what do people want to have in place before we move gcc-5.2 into > > > ~arch ? > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] moving gcc-5.2 to unstable

On Thu, 2015-10-01 at 09:49 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > what do people want to have in place before we move gcc-5.2 into ~arch ? For one thing, the fix for runtime failure in 64-bit wine: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66838 https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=

Re: [gentoo-dev] LLVM static libs

On Sun, 2015-09-20 at 22:32 +0200, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote: > Hi, > > the first question is addressed both to llvm-dev and gentoo-dev. The > second one is Gentoo specific. > > Is there any possibility to build LLVM both as static and shared libraries? > > What I see currently is that our ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] Inconsistent and messy layout of team maintainership in Gentoo

On Thu, 2015-09-17 at 07:20 -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > On 9/17/15 7:05 AM, James Le Cuirot wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 06:57:08 -0400 > > "Anthony G. Basile" wrote: > > > > > Totally rethink the idea of emails aliases as something that is > > > created on the fly. We just need to know

Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support

On Wed, 2015-09-09 at 11:00 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > I would really like a way to toggle gtk3 for testing. If you don't > want to expose it as a 'supported' option for users, then masking it > sounds fine to me. Then add the flag, document it in metadata.xml. But in general, try to avoid usin

Re: [gentoo-dev] www-client/chromium gtk3 support

On Wed, 2015-09-09 at 09:20 +0200, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: In chromium's case (a new gtk3-based ui that needs wider testing), a local gtk3 USE flag does make sense. But in general, the gnome team recommends avoiding the gtk3 flag whenever possible. We definitely don't want it to become a global

Re: [gentoo-dev] gnatbuild.eclass refactoring: new/transitory eclass?

On Thu, 2015-09-03 at 16:00 +0200, George Shapovalov wrote: > 2. Is there some standard naming scheme? Should the new eclass be called, > say, > gnatbuild2.eclass or gnatbuild-ng.eclass? Of course this only matters if old > eclass is there to stay. If not I'll just call the transitory eclass >

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA bikeshed: killing USE=dedicated in favor of uniform USE=client+server

On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 19:42 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, > > Right now, a number of game packages are using USE=dedicated to control > 'installing a dedicated game server only'. Aside to that, some game > packages also have USE=server that controls building the server itself. > Non-game packag

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: useflag policies

On Wed, 2015-08-12 at 00:02 +1000, Michael Palimaka wrote: > 3. Create a whole new solution like USE="gui" (what happens if I have > multiple gui implementation USE flags set?) This is what I would suggest. It would remove 90% of the problem since most applications use only one gui toolkit. If no

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: useflag policies

On Tue, 2015-08-11 at 16:04 +0300, Sergey Popov wrote: > You want to migrate to such decision? Like: > > qt? ( > > qt5? ( dev-lang/qtcore:5 ) > > !qt5? ( dev-lang/qtcore:4 ) > ) > > Fine by me, if you would ask. That flag should be called "gui". Not "qt". This would be the real solu

Re: [gentoo-dev] Referencing bug reports in git (WAS: Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: sci-libs/opencascade/)

On Sun, 2015-08-09 at 17:30 +0200, hasufell wrote: > On 08/09/2015 05:19 PM, Tobias Klausmann wrote: > > On Sun, 09 Aug 2015, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > > > > I'd just go with "Gentoo-Bug". The X- is pointless since it was > > for eXtending Email-Headers. And what we do is only linked in > > style. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: useflag policies

On Sun, 2015-08-09 at 22:38 +0300, Sergey Popov wrote: > > > In short - apropriate REQUIRED_USE with setting recommended > USE-flag(e.g. USE="+qt4 qt5" or USE="qt4 +qt5") > > If a package has optional guis, why should users of the default profile get any gui enabled by default? The default pro

Re: [gentoo-dev] useflag policies

On Tue, 2015-08-04 at 11:59 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 4 August 2015 at 04:20, Rich Freeman wrote: > > [...] > > Gentoo should be the best of both worlds. We should give users the > > power to tweak things, but we shouldn't force them to play with config > > files all day long just to have a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Problems updating Qt from 4.8.6 to 4.8.7

On Sun, 2015-07-05 at 21:25 +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > On 05.07.2015 20:44, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > What I usually end up doing is listing my installed dev-qt/qt* ebuilds, and > > updating all of them together explicitly: > > > > emerge -1 qtcore:4 qtgui

Re: [gentoo-dev] Problems updating Qt from 4.8.6 to 4.8.7

On Sun, 2015-07-05 at 20:25 +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Hi there! > > > I'm having trouble updating Qt:4 (dev-qt/qt*-4.8*:4) from 4.8.6 to 4.8.7. > Looking at the ebuilds, they require some 4.8.7 versions to be installed > already that in turn cannot be installed because other ebuilds requi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Git workflow

On Sun, 2015-07-05 at 02:16 +0700, C Bergström wrote: > 2) I don't understand your comment about signatures. Gpg commit signatures [1] which are a requirement for any gentoo git workflow. Rebasing breaks the author's signature afaict, so the user who is doing rebasing needs to re-sign the commit u

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-backup/deja-dup: deja-dup-34.0.ebuild ChangeLog

This was supposed to be an email only to Pacho, unfortunately I didn't check the "to" line and sent it to the list. But since it has gone to the list - it would be useful to have an automatic tool scanning for unsigned or incorrectly signed Manifests and maybe listing them in https://qa-reports.ge

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-backup/deja-dup: deja-dup-34.0.ebuild ChangeLog

x86/app-backup/deja-dup/ChangeLog,v > 1.60 2015/06/27 16:53:54 tetromino Exp $ > +# $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/app-backup/deja-dup/ChangeLog,v > 1.61 2015/06/27 17:00:47 pacho Exp $ > + > + 27 Jun 2015; Pacho Ramos deja-dup-34.0.ebuild: > + Also looks to work fine with

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-misc/strongswan USE_EXPAND

On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 07:06 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2015-06-23, o godz. 01:23:13 > Jason Zaman napisał(a): > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:55:45PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Dnia 2015-06-22, o godz. 16:38:30 > > > Jason Zaman napisał(a): > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I

Re: [gentoo-dev] arm64 profile deletes?

On Mon, 2015-03-30 at 10:37 -0500, Tom Gall wrote: > > On Mar 30, 2015, at 10:18 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev > > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2015-03-30 at 09:54 -0500, Tom Gall wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> Sorry for the trouble. My cvs history foo

Re: [gentoo-dev] arm64 profile deletes?

On Mon, 2015-03-30 at 09:54 -0500, Tom Gall wrote: > Hi All, > > Sorry for the trouble. My cvs history foo is a little weak but it appears > that someone went out and did some deleting in profiles/arch/arm64 of some > WIP things without bothering to email, irc or otherwise communicate. > > A) C

Re: [gentoo-dev] Should there be a preference with qt4 and qt5 USE flags?

On Sun, 2015-03-08 at 21:31 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > Some ebuilds in portage for Qt-based software support both Qt4 as well > as Qt5. Some have "+qt4 qt5" in IUSE, others have "qt4 qt5". > > Is there a guideline for this somewhere? If a package needs Qt and thus > lists: > >REQUIRE

Re: [gentoo-dev] don't rely on dynamic deps

On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 01:13 +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jul 2014 21:34:10 -0400 > Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > Why not adapt the updates mechanism for modifying rdepends? Perhaps > > something like > > > > rdepends-add foo-bar/blah-3.14 &q

Re: [gentoo-dev] don't rely on dynamic deps

On Mon, 2014-07-21 at 22:56 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Yes, it does. I'm not sure if it leads anywhere, though. Dynamic deps > are a pipe dream. You can't implement them properly, so we're using > half-working implementation as an excuse to be lazy. Why not adapt the updates mechanism for modify

Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch

On Mon, 2014-06-30 at 11:29 +, hasufell wrote: > > I agree that masking for testing is like having a 3rd branch, but I'm > > not convinced that this is a bad thing. > > I have to reiterate: > * increases the workload, because we are effectively running 3 branches > * decreases the amount of te

Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch

On Sun, 2014-06-29 at 23:01 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > I am starting a new thread so we don't refer to a specific package, but I > am quoting Rich and hasufell from the previous masking thread. > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:04:54AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014

Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in installed ebuilds

On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 22:15 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: > So, why the heck, was the dependency to dev-libs/glib changed for an > existing ebuild without increasing its version (e.g. dbus-glib-0.100.2-r2)? Please see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/91615 > I have to use an olde

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: crossdev and multilib interference

On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 11:20 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > On 06/17/2014 10:56, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 10:17 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > >> What I'd like to see is a list of all affected packages so we all can get a > >> sense of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: crossdev and multilib interference

On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 10:17 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > What I'd like to see is a list of all affected packages so we all can get a > sense of just how big the actual problem really is. All I am hearing so far > are unsubstantiated claims of tree-wide breakage. Knowing which packages > are brok

Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?

On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 12:50 -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > Example: glib and gobject-introspection. s/gobject-introspection/dbus-glib/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?

On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:41 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > Considering the libtool versioning, there are two kinds of library > bumps relevant to us: > > 1) when ABI is altered in backwards-compatible way (so old stuff is not > touched), > > 2) when ABI is altered in backwards-incompatible way. Th

Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?

On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 17:31 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 12:17:52 -0400 > Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:56 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:50:29 -0400 > > > Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: &g

Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?

On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:56 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:50:29 -0400 > Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:13 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 16:41:51 +0200 > > > Michał Górny wrote: > > &

Re: [gentoo-dev] Subslots: should they be bumped like SONAME or on any ABI changes?

On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:13 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 16:41:51 +0200 > Michał Górny wrote: > > However, this means that we force much more rebuilds than necessary. > > This shouldn't be considered to be a problem. This would be suicide for Gentoo as a distro. Organizati

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Banning modification of pkg-config files

On Sat, 2014-05-10 at 13:50 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 10 May 2014 04:34, Markos Chandras wrote: > > On 05/09/2014 09:32 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > >> On Fri, 9 May 2014 16:15:58 -0400 > >> Rich Freeman wrote: > >> > >>> I think fixing upstream is a no-brainer. > >> > >> It indeed is, this is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs / looking for new primary maintainers

On Sun, 2014-04-20 at 17:09 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > x11-libs/cairo I will take this. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable masks on multilib packages

On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 17:25 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > I'm strongly considering reverting these changes in the packages I > maintain. I'm tired of having to deal time and again with multilib > breakage. > > Either that, or someone else can take over primary maintainership. Ben, if you are uncom

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable masks on multilib packages

On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 17:14 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 1 April 2014 21:58, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:13 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > >> On 1 April 2014 06:16, Michał Górny wrote: > >> > Hello, all. > >> > > >&

Re: [gentoo-dev] Stable masks on multilib packages

On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:13 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 1 April 2014 06:16, Michał Górny wrote: > > Hello, all. > > > > The late multilib ppc issues made me re-check our stable masks on > > abi_x86_* flags and, honestly, I'm not sure if we're doing things > > the right way. > > > > That said,

Re: [gentoo-dev] sandbox access violations while running matlab binary installer

The best solution is to figure out why the directory is being created there and whether it is customizable. Maybe the code actually is creating $HOME/InstallShield? Then export HOME=${T} in your ebuild. On March 31, 2014 2:24:24 PM EDT, Kfir Lavi wrote: >On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Samuli

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: crossdev and multilib interference

On Thu, 2014-03-27 at 02:07 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > An amd64 multilib system *is* expected to build x86 > > binaries that would be hosted on itself. So i686-pc-linux-gnu-ar is > > expected to be not a part of any cross-compile toolchain, but a part of > > the native toolchain for the machi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: crossdev and multilib interference

On Wed, 2014-03-26 at 22:41 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wed 26 Mar 2014 12:23:53 Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > > On 26/03/14 12:12 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > that's bs. people install crossdev to get a cross-compile > > > environment, not to get something that only works through `emerge`. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] crossdev and multilib interference

On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 09:55 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 2014-03-12, o godz. 15:46:01 > hasufell napisał(a): > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA512 > > > > We have a problem where the crossdev pkg-config wrapper scripts > > interfere with multilib. > > > > crossdev for e

Re: [gentoo-dev] crossdev and multilib interference

On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 15:46 +, hasufell wrote: > We have a problem where the crossdev pkg-config wrapper scripts > interfere with multilib. > > crossdev for example sets in their pkg-config wrappers: > > PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR="${SYSROOT}/usr/lib/pkgconfig:${SYSROOT}/usr/share/pkgconfig" > > Now,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Make udev optional in net-wireless/bluez?

On Wed, 2014-03-12 at 14:24 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: > Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > > Making udev dependency always on is a deliberate choice here > > I thought Gentoo was about users having choice? Sad face. Gentoo is usually about the maintainer's choice ;) So in the end it's up to Pacho: h

Re: [gentoo-dev] Make udev optional in net-wireless/bluez?

On Mon, 2014-03-10 at 01:45 -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > On Sun, 2014-03-09 at 23:22 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > > On 03/08/2014 9:55 PM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > > On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 21:23 -0500, Joshua Kinard wrote: > > >> So I want to try and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Make udev optional in net-wireless/bluez?

On Sun, 2014-03-09 at 23:22 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > On 03/08/2014 9:55 PM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 21:23 -0500, Joshua Kinard wrote: > >> So I want to try and play around with a particular network domination tool > >> on my home netwo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Make udev optional in net-wireless/bluez?

On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 21:23 -0500, Joshua Kinard wrote: > So I want to try and play around with a particular network domination tool > on my home network, Omphalos. However, its current configure script has a > hard dependency on bluetooth.h, part of the net-wireless/bluez package. > > Currently,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding slot and subslot deps to others' packages

On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 15:54 +0400, Sergey Popov wrote: > 02.03.2014 19:52, Michał Górny пишет: > > Dnia 2014-03-02, o godz. 16:45:03 > > Jeroen Roovers napisał(a): > > > >> On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 09:37:22 +0100 > >> Michał Górny wrote: > >> > >>> Few months ago I have written a small FAQ on how to u

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Sat, 2014-02-22 at 15:59 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 15:50:17 -0600 > Ryan Hill wrote: > > > On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:09:53 -0500 > > Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2014-02-22 at 14:57 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Sat, 2014-02-22 at 14:57 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > wxGTK not only splits up libraries by version and toolkit, but also by charset > and debug/release. If we had to use different SLOTs rather than USE flags we > would need eight of them for 2.8 alone. And I don't know how we would name > the >

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 10:26 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>> On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > > Unfortunately, at the same time, lots of other developers are going > > to start adding support for building against gtk2 XOR gtk3. Because >

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 03:23 -0600, Steev Klimaszewski wrote: > The KDE team seems to be able to deal with it just fine, but somehow > it's impossible and hard for the GNOME team. Why is that? What does > KDE do differently that makes it feasible? The KDE ecosystem moved from qt3 to qt4 around 20

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: new global USE flag gtk3

On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 02:47 -0600, Steev Klimaszewski wrote: > OR, since I'm the maintainer, I decide that I'm willing to deal with > both, instead of you telling me that I need to pick one or the other. > Upstream says both are supported and viable, and I'm willing to deal > with the headaches. J

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dealing with XDG directories in ebuild environment

On Wed, 2014-01-29 at 09:58 +0100, Jan Matejka wrote: > What's the point of having nonempty XDG_ variables in ebuilds? One big reason is FEATURES=test. Test suites for freedesktop-compliant programs that actually run the program are likely to fail if XDG_* directories are resolved as something unw

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dealing with XDG directories in ebuild environment

[Replying again since my mailer messed up my original message.] On Tue, 2014-01-28 at 12:03 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > Option 3: Unset the variables > > This should cause applications to default to locations under ${HOME}. > This could be done in global scope (unless I am overlooking something

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dealing with XDG directories in ebuild environment

On January 28, 2014 12:03:04 PM EST, Mike Gilbert wrote: >Option 3: Unset the variables > >This should cause applications to default to locations under ${HOME}. Only those applications that properly comply with standards :) For instance, glib did not start respecting ${HOME} until version 2.36

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: app-arch/xarchiver

On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 20:12 +0100, yac wrote: > c6 indicates xarchiver will break on unrar-5 when it will go stable but > it still is not stable, is it? Given the way this issue is > communicated, I have to ask - Is it even true? The rar major version > seems to be related to rar format version rat

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: status of OpenRC's public API

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 22:48 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 09:04:06PM -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > app-admin/openrc-settingsd uses various functions (rc_sys(), > > rc_runlevel_get(), rc_service_exists(), rc_service_in_runlevel(), > &g

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: status of OpenRC's public API

On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 19:16 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > OpenRC currently has a public api, consisting of librc and libeinfo > (rc.h and einfo.h are the headers); however, I do not know of any > released software that uses these, so, if there is nothing, I am > considering making this co

Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in libreoffice ebuild

On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 10:10 +0200, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > As per my comment in bugzilla [1] I said that the patch should be > submitted upstream prior having it in cvs. > > > Yet you decided to completely ignore my statement and just smash in > the patch anyway [2]. > > > Please don't do this e

Re: [gentoo-dev] Response to a "friendly note" about changing bug reports

On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 09:35 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:04:28 +0200 > > "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > >> That's fine, bug wranglers are doing a great job there. > >> > >> However, I'm also sick of getting bugmail bec

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gnome Stabilization 3.6 or 3.8

On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 14:45 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: > Greetings, > > Gnome Herd decided to target stablilization of 3.8 [1] which requires > systemd. > > What are the reasons to stable 3.8 and not 3.6, a version w/o this > restriction, enabling all non systemd users to profit from this > eye-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Dropping static libs support from cryptsetup and lvm2

On Wed, 2013-07-31 at 22:12 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > Honestly, I don't think maintainers should be asked to justify > features unless they're actually causing some kind of conflict. > > If Robin wants to support USE=static for lvm2, he can do so. If it > somehow caused problems with other pac

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH systemd.eclass] Introduce systemd_is_booted().

On Wed, 2013-07-24 at 16:17 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Pacho requested that to be able to warn users in GNOME packages that > > do not work anymore without systemd. > > Why is the host where the package is built required to run systemd? > W

RE: [gentoo-dev] Temporary DevRel actions for CoC violations

Gentoo developers have been resigning from the project because they got burned out by dealing with ad-hominems, insults, and flames. I do not see CoC enforcement as some sort of plot to enforce groupthink or silence debate, but as an attempt to fix the real problem of burnout and talent drain.

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME migrating from GConf to GSettings; effects on Gentoo?

On Wed, 2013-05-01 at 04:19 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > I think I just realized what this means. I run ICEWM, not GNOME. > GNUMERIC and ABIWORWD and GIMP are the 3 GNOME apps that I use a lot. > Do I have to emerge GNOME-BASE in it's entirety just to get GSettings > working? Then I misunderstoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME migrating from GConf to GSettings; effects on Gentoo?

On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 23:26 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:17:35PM -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote > > > It impacts users who use stable keywords and are therefore stuck with > > GNOME-2.32. The workaround is for affected users to switch to ~arch >

Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME migrating from GConf to GSettings; effects on Gentoo?

On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 22:29 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > I was going to file a bug at bugzilla, but this looks like it's going > to involve virtually every GNOME-related app, so playing whack-a-mole is > going to be painfull. It'll have to be tackled higher up, which is why > I'm posting here. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Establishing Gentoo patch policy to keep our patches consistent and clean

On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 20:08 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > 2. Patches have to apply to the top directory of the source tree with > 'patch -p1'. If patches are applied to sub-directories, necessary '-p' > argument shall be passed to 'epatch' explicitly. Developers are > encouraged to create patches wh

Re: [gentoo-dev] libpng 1.6 upgrade and subslotting (and misuse of subslotting when there is also normal slotting)

On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 23:44 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: > libpng 1.6 is in portage, but temporarily without KEYWORDS, pending on > testign and this conversion, help would be much appericiated with > converting the tree to use automatic rebuilds for the upgrade > > Because there is binary-only

Re: [gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted: x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers

On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 11:28 -0500, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 10:48:07PM -0500, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote > > > I am sorry that this package has been such a headache for you, > > unfortunately binary drivers (especially) are often like that. Thanks > > for all your hard work

Re: [gentoo-dev] Removals reply

On Sun, 2013-02-03 at 06:07 +0100, Vaeth wrote: > So this 30 day delay will enable these people to get involved, > especially for all the packages which were removed in the last years? > Now it is apparent that an archive for dropped packages (in the > form of keeping masked packages or some other

Re: [gentoo-dev] collision-protect -> protect-owned ?

On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 00:25 -0500, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: > On 01/03/2013 12:06 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 19:49:02 -0800 > > ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote: > > > >> It came up again with , > >> and I think it's worth to

Re: [gentoo-dev] About using a CONFIGURATION (or SETUP) file under /usr/share/doc for configuration information

On Sun, 2012-12-23 at 12:20 +, Markos Chandras wrote: > But like I said, elog messages are already saved in > /var/log/portage/elog/$cat/$pf so people can > read these. Isn't this the same with what you suggest? Is that by default? And when was that default added? I certainly do not have /va

Re: [gentoo-dev] Is /var/cache the right place for repositories?

On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 18:27 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > The FHS says: > >/var/cache is intended for cached data from applications. Such data >is locally generated as a result of time-consuming I/O or >calculation. The application must be able to regenerate or restore >the data.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Defaulting for debug information in profiles

On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 11:11 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > Hi lads, > lately I am having bit of problems from getting relevant debug info from > users. > > Since we already have splitdebug for quite time (and I suppose quite > few of us are using it) how about making it to default profiles > defau

[gentoo-dev] new global USE flag: orc

Currently, the "orc" local USE flag is used by 11 packages, 9 of them with identical descriptions. I think it's time to make it a global flag. I would suggest the following description: "Use dev-lang/orc for just-in-time optimization of array operations" Current flag users: media-libs/gst-plugins

[gentoo-dev] Lastrites: mail-client/claws-mail-geolocation

# Alexandre Rostovtsev (05 Dec 2012) # Masked for removal in 30 days. # Incompatible with recent cogl and clutter versions (bug #435164) mail-client/claws-mail-geolocation

[gentoo-dev] some questions about using subslots and EAPI5

Suppose I am upgrading an existing ebuild for dev-libs/libfoo-2.5 to EAPI5 and adding a subslot, e.g. SLOT="2/5". Should I then add "slotmove =dev-libs/libfoo-2.5 2 2/5" in profiles/updates? Or should it be "slotmove =dev-libs/libfoo-2.5 2/2 2/5" (since the PMS states that "When the sub-slot part i

Re: [gentoo-dev] A script/binary that iterates over arguments and spits out different variants?

On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 19:18 +0100, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > For a while I've been thinking that it would be sweet to feed all > variants (enabled/disabled) of several USE flags to a script to automate > testing with different USE flag combinations. > > USE=" x y" > USE="-x y" > USE=" x -y" > USE=

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer needed: dev-libs/icu

On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 11:35 -0700, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > The problem with ICU is worse than you expect. For once, with version > 50, it changes ABI (but not soname as far as I can tell) depending on > which compiler you build it with. Yes, this is pretty much fucked up. It's even worse than

Re: [gentoo-dev] gnome2-utils.eclass: updated DISABLE_DEPRECATED fix

The previously sent patch contained two problems. First, it assumed that the config-header to be touched is necessarily called config.h.in. This is not the case; for example, goffice uses goffice-config.h.in. Second, and more importantly, it touched aclocal.m4 and config.h.in even if configure.ac w

[gentoo-dev] gnome2-utils.eclass: updated DISABLE_DEPRECATED fix

The recently added gnome2_disable_deprecation_warning() unfortunately triggered maintainer mode and undesirable autoreconf for some packages like file-roller, leading to build failure (see bug #439602); the problem had been caused by configure.ac having a higher mtime than aclocal.m4 and config.h.i

Re: [gentoo-dev] About DESCRIPTION in ebuilds needing to end with a dot "."

On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 21:01 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Hello > > At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would > you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman > warning? > > Thanks for your opinions In English, it is also mandatory to end sentenc

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Drop EAPI=0 requirement for system packages.

On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 16:38 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > It's my understanding that higher EAPI levels include more features. > How backwards compatable are the EAPI levels? I.e. assume that we take > an ebuild with EAPI 0, and slap in EAPI=1 (or 2 or 3, etc) at the top, > without any other chang

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Clarify the "as-is" license?

On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 13:04 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > I'll also remove as-is from @GPL-COMPATIBLE and @OSI-APPROVED again, > as soon as all packages in the system set have been fixed (only > net-misc/openssh and sys-apps/man-pages). It shouldn't have been added > to these groups, in the first

Re: [gentoo-dev] Clarify the "as-is" license?

On Sun, 2012-09-23 at 23:37 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > - net-wireless/zd1201-firmware: No license in tarball or on homepage. Ubuntu distributes it in their linux-firmware package with the following LICENCE.zd1201 file: The firmware was originally distributed by Zydas in their original drive

Re: [gentoo-dev] vala.eclass: change vala_src_prepare behavior when USE=-vala

On Thu, 2012-09-20 at 08:43 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El jue, 20-09-2012 a las 02:14 -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev escribió: > > Revised to use a separate variable for the name of the flag instead of > > reading IUSE, as suggested by Ciaran McCreesh. As a result of this > > ch

Re: [gentoo-dev] vala.eclass: change vala_src_prepare behavior when USE=-vala

Revised to use a separate variable for the name of the flag instead of reading IUSE, as suggested by Ciaran McCreesh. As a result of this change, vala.eclass now defaults to assuming that vala support is optional (which is the case in an overwhelming majority of ebuilds that would want to use this

[gentoo-dev] vala.eclass: change vala_src_prepare behavior when USE=-vala

Pacho Ramos has suggested making vala_src_prepare() into a no-op in the common situation where vala is in IUSE and USE=-vala. --- a/vala.eclass +++ b/vala.eclass @@ -77,20 +77,36 @@ } # @FUNCTION: vala_src_prepare -# @USAGE: [--vala-api-version api_version] +# @USAGE: [--ignore-use] [--vala-ap

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass

On Sun, 2012-09-09 at 22:09 -0400, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > Revised proposal with suggestions from Nirbheek. VALA_API_VERSION has > been split into max and min to make it easier for packages to depend on > a range of vala slots. > > # Copyright 1999-2012 Gentoo Foundation

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass

: vala.eclass # @MAINTAINER: # gn...@gentoo.org # @AUTHOR: # Alexandre Rostovtsev # @BLURB: Sets up the environment for using a specific version of vala. # @DESCRIPTION: # This eclass sets up commonly used environment variables for using a specific # version of dev-lang/vala to configure and build a

Re: [gentoo-dev] EJOBS variable for EAPI 5? (was: [RFC] Create a JOBS variable to replace -jX in MAKEOPTS)

On Fri, 2012-08-31 at 15:45 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:21:15 +0200 > Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > Coming back to this old topic [1]. Is there still consensus that we > > should have such an EJOBS variable? (It shouldn't be called JOBS > > because this name is too generic,

Re: [gentoo-dev] prune_libtool_files() and pkg-config dependency

On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 00:02 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:50:16 -0400 > Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > In other words, pkg-config is only used when no other criteria > > > allows it to classify the particular .la file a

Re: [gentoo-dev] supporting static-libs

On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 02:15 +0200, hasufell wrote: > Is there a reason not to support static-libs in an ebuild if the package > supports it? > > It seems some developers don't care about this option. What's the gentoo > policy on this? Isn't this actually a bug? For example, static linking is dis

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass

: # Alexandre Rostovtsev # @BLURB: Sets up the environment for using a specific version of vala. # @DESCRIPTION: # This eclass sets up commonly used environment variables for using a specific # version of dev-lang/vala to configure and build a package. It is needed for # packages whose build systems

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass

On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 22:45 -0400, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 19:43:32 -0400 > Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: > > The variables that vala_pkg_setup sets are needed only at build time. > > so it should be vala_src_prepare / unpack instead ? > definitely not anyt

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass

Second update, incorporating suggestions by Ulrich and Duncan. # Copyright 1999-2012 Gentoo Foundation # Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2 # $Header: $ # @ECLASS: vala.eclass # @MAINTAINER: # gn...@gentoo.org # @AUTHOR: # Alexandre Rostovtsev # @BLURB: Sets up the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] new vala.eclass

On Sun, 2012-08-26 at 15:45 -0700, Zac Medico wrote: > Note that pkg_setup is called for binary packages too, which means that > DEPEND may not necessarily be installed. In EAPI 4 you can check the > MERGE_TYPE variable which can have a value of binary, source, orbuildonly. The variables that vala

  1   2   >