On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 05:36:08PM +0200, Micha?? Górny wrote:
> I don't think there's a reason to do so. We have ddrescue, and users
> should be encouraged to migrate to that.
Ah, found it (sys-fs/ddrescue, not sys-fs/dd-rescue) and it actually
does all the stuff that dd-rhelp does.
I guess in th
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 16:50:21 +0200
Wernfried Haas wrote:
> I'd do it myself if i were ebuild maintainer (which i am not), but
> maybe someone could pick this up and just make a new ebuild for 0.1.2?
> Seems to be a quite simple job and whoever is willing to save this
> really useful tool will get
Hi,
while this is a tool i never like to use, it's really hand in case you
have it around.
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 09:23:30AM +0200, Diego E. Pettenò wrote:
> # Obsolete even by upstream standard, since version 0.1.2
> # is out since 2007 (and has a version bump request in bug
> # #223299 since M
# Diego E. Pettenò (22 Oct 2010)
# on behalf of QA team
#
# Obsolete even by upstream standard, since version 0.1.2
# is out since 2007 (and has a version bump request in bug
# #223299 since May 2008); uses “obsolete” tail/head
# syntax (bug #159606, the warning has since been removed
# from cor
# Diego E. Pettenò (22 Oct 2010)
# on behalf of QA team
#
# Outdated even by upstream standards (last version is 0.1.2,
# bug #223299 open May 2008); uses obsolete head/tail syntax
# (bug #159606); has maintainer-mode-triggered rebuild (bug
# #318487) without depending on autotools (and thus fai
