Re: OT: [gentoo-dev] Nazi symbols on Gentoo (and other offending content)

2008-04-28 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 02:27 Mon 28 Apr , Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Sunday 27 April 2008, Santiago M. Mola wrote: > > Anyway, next time I'll use @-project, and let's see if someone > > actually cares about that mailing list. > > unfortunately (fortunately?), that's the way the Gentoo community wants it. > gent

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Dependencies that're available at pkg_*inst

2008-04-28 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 05:57:04 +0100 Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:41:57 +0100 > > Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Use PDEPEND. > > > > PDEPEND has a different meaning, and isn't suitable for runtime > > dependencies. > > > "PDEP

Re: [gentoo-dev] DevRel policy update

2008-04-28 Thread Richard Brown
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Chrissy Fullam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wulf C. Krueger wrote: > As this change directly affects developers only, please take further > discussion to the Gentoo-core ML. I'd like to, but I appear to have been unsubscribed from that list. Assuming that my ret

[gentoo-dev] Re: gcc-4.2 / gcc-4.3 plans

2008-04-28 Thread Ryan Hill
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:14:37 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > the x86 cld revert is in now as well as some more upstream pr fixes. > i'll probably let things settle for this week and pending any > craziness, move gcc-4.3.0-r1 into ~arch in a week. i'll prob commit > some "obvi