On 07/18/2013 12:06 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-07-17, o godz. 17:42:32
> "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" napisał(a):
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>
>> On 07/17/2013 05:34 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
...and th
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:17:41 -0400
Chris Reffett wrote:
> I discussed this with hasufell on IRC, but I'll lay out the response
> on the list too. Yes, this was my fault.
It doesn't really matter whose fault it is, but since you introduced the
change, please fix the blockers of the bug # in subjec
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Dnia 2013-07-17, o godz. 17:42:32
"Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" napisał(a):
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 07/17/2013 05:34 PM, hasufell wrote:
> > On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> >> ...and that i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 23:34:36 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> That means the methods for eclass changes must be more thoroughly.
So must the methods to write ebuilds be more thoroughly; therefore, I
think that we can somewhat build a script that checks this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 11:55 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>
>
> It is my understanding that if you directly use a function from an
> eclass you are REQUIRED to inherit that eclass. Given that kind
> of sanity would have prevented these failures I fin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 05:47 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 11:42 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> On 07/17/2013 05:34 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote:
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 11:42 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 05:34 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>>> On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote:
On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote:
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 05:34 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote:
>>> On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote:
I know there was an announcement about the upcoming chang
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote:
>> On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to
>>> cmake-utils.eclass, however... it i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to
>> cmake-utils.eclass, however... it is not enough to give a deadline
>> without caring if people
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote:
> I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to
> cmake-utils.eclass, however... it is not enough to give a deadline
> without caring if people actually fixed it by then.
>
> By doing that you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to
cmake-utils.eclass, however... it is not enough to give a deadline
without caring if people actually fixed it by then.
By doing that you risk breaking stable packages which is not trivial.
12 matches
Mail list logo
