On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:19:17 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:00:21 +0200
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>
> > 2009-05-17 22:51:50 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> > > On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
> > > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > > > So, unless you're doing a pkgmove
>
On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:00:21 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2009-05-17 22:51:50 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> > On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
> > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > > So, unless you're doing a pkgmove
> > > it's a dangerous thing since the PM can't reliably track revers
On Sun, 17 May 2009 20:40:41 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Ryan Hill posted
> 2009051752.133c7...@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca, excerpted below, on Sun, 17
> May 2009 11:11:52 -0600:
>
> >> Do we want to document the following? (do we have already?) - When is
> >> it allowed to
2009-05-17 22:51:50 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
> Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > So, unless you're doing a pkgmove
> > it's a dangerous thing since the PM can't reliably track reverse deps
> > when doing uninstalls since it has to use the vdb entry for that,
> > doesn't i
On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 17.05.2009, 11:11 -0600 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2009 23:31:25 +0200
> > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> >
> > > Wrong. For example:
> > > - stuff like docompress may change the content being installed depending
> >
On Sun, 17 May 2009 20:40:41 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> (See EAPI-3, now preapproved, but conditional on feature
> implementation, with removal of some feature or other possible before
> final approval if not all PMs support it in a timely manner.)
EAPI 3's approval is base
Ryan Hill posted
2009051752.133c7...@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca, excerpted below, on Sun, 17
May 2009 11:11:52 -0600:
>> Do we want to document the following? (do we have already?) - When is
>> it allowed to use an EAPI in the tree (given as offset to the release
>> of portage supporting that eapi
Am Sonntag, den 17.05.2009, 11:11 -0600 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> On Fri, 15 May 2009 23:31:25 +0200
> Tiziano Müller wrote:
>
> > Wrong. For example:
> > - stuff like docompress may change the content being installed depending
> > on the package manager
> > - --disable-static (maybe in a later EAPI)
On Fri, 15 May 2009 23:31:25 +0200
Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Wrong. For example:
> - stuff like docompress may change the content being installed depending
> on the package manager
> - --disable-static (maybe in a later EAPI) changes content
> - slot-dep-operators change the rdepend of installed pa
Duncan wrote:
> Petteri Räty posted 4a0dd0ed.1070...@gentoo.org,
> excerpted below, on Fri, 15 May 2009 23:30:37 +0300:
>
>> Indeed there's no problem switching EAPIs as long as a stable Portage
>> supports the EAPI you are migrating to. Portage was buggy with this when
>> EAPI 2 was introduced
Petteri Räty posted 4a0dd0ed.1070...@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on Fri, 15 May 2009 23:30:37 +0300:
> Indeed there's no problem switching EAPIs as long as a stable Portage
> supports the EAPI you are migrating to. Portage was buggy with this when
> EAPI 2 was introduced but that has since been
11 matches
Mail list logo
