On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:52:19 -0800
Patrick McLean wrote:
I will push the attached version with zmedico's change on Friday unless
there are objections (I have addressed all the feedback so far AFAIK).
> Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I think
> we should start workin
On 11/7/19 11:52 AM, Patrick McLean wrote:
> DEPEND="
> elibc_glibc? ( || (
> sys-libs/glibc[crypt(+)]
If a new version of glibc will remove crypt then it needs to be
something like:
|| ( >=sys-libs/glibc-2.30-r2[crypt(-)]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital s
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 20:40:40 +
Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:52:19 -0800
> Patrick McLean wrote:
>
> > Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I
> > think we should start working out the kinks well in advance.
> > Toolchain has already added a packa
On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 21:28:34 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-11-07 at 11:52 -0800, Patrick McLean wrote:
> > Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I
> > think we should start working out the kinks well in advance.
> > Toolchain has already added a package.use.for
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:52:19 -0800
Patrick McLean wrote:
> Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I think
> we should start working out the kinks well in advance. Toolchain has
> already added a package.use.force-ed "crypt" USE flag to
> sys-libs/glibc-2.30-r2 [2]. The main
On Thu, 2019-11-07 at 11:52 -0800, Patrick McLean wrote:
> Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I think
> we should start working out the kinks well in advance. Toolchain has
> already added a package.use.force-ed "crypt" USE flag to
> sys-libs/glibc-2.30-r2 [2]. The main
