Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Maybe you remember the discussions about stable vs. dev kernel
> branches: the kernel folks wanted to give up stable branches,
> leaving them to the individual distros and concentrate just on
> devel branch. A lot of people were totally unhappy with this
> idea, so they abo
* Rémi Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Best example on how to do that is gstreamer. All the plugins come in 3
> tarballs but each can be built individually. Really clean.
ACK. That's how it always should be.
All my own packages also work this way - ev'ry thing else
doesnt get released ;-P
Enrico Weigelt a écrit :
* Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
My suggestion: make those language bindings being separate
packages. So, other packages can depend on them directly,
instead of the current, build-breaking hack.
I'm not advocating gentoo should do thi
* Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >My suggestion: make those language bindings being separate
> >packages. So, other packages can depend on them directly,
> >instead of the current, build-breaking hack.
> >
> >I'm not advocating gentoo should do this step alone,
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
My suggestion: make those language bindings being separate
packages. So, other packages can depend on them directly,
instead of the current, build-breaking hack.
I'm not advocating gentoo should do this step alone, but
instead join in the upstream and solve it there.
T
* Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2272
According to this bug, portage still can't handle use-deps,
there's just a standard way for breaking the build on missing
useflags.
Exactly what I already suspected.
cu
--
---
On Thu, 1 May 2008 18:23:28 +0200
Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But that discussion can come after Portage gets use dependencies...
> > Which, as I understand it, won't be for at least another eighteen
> > months because three more people have just asked for them.
>
> I'm a bit con
* Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> Not really. For packages that support it, it just means adding a way
> for that package to be told to do a partial rebuild for the addition of
> a use flag.
Ugh, partial rebuilds are alway tricky and tend to make things
even more complicated and er
On Thu, 01 May 2008 19:05:35 +0300
Mart Raudsepp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It still means a rebuild of the binding providing library, which
> involves unnecessary recompilation of the (typically) C or C++
> library, which in some cases can be a huge time sink - that in the
> case that the librar
On N, 2008-05-01 at 17:52 +0200, Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > while building yum, I again ran into trouble because one
> > dependency has to be rebuilt with an specific useflag first
> > (in this ca
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> while building yum, I again ran into trouble because one
> dependency has to be rebuilt with an specific useflag first
> (in this case it was libxml2 + python useflag). Actually,
> there are *lots* of t
Ever heard of use dependencies? Way you are proposing this is just
more work and no solutions to real problems.
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
>
> while building yum, I again ran into trouble because one
> dependency has to be rebuilt wit
Hi folks,
while building yum, I again ran into trouble because one
dependency has to be rebuilt with an specific useflag first
(in this case it was libxml2 + python useflag). Actually,
there are *lots* of these cases and (AFAIK) portage has no
way for properly handling this - it's up to the
13 matches
Mail list logo
