On Saturday 01 November 2008 02:44:50 Josh Saddler wrote:
> emboss - Seriously. Who needs the European Biology Open Software Suite
> on a *desktop* oriented system?
That flag is only used by a few sci-biology packages, so if you don't have any
of those installed, it doesn't matter whether the fla
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
(#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
G
Hi,
I would like to add a new category to the tree: lxde-base, to be used
for the LXDE desktop [1,2] packages, in correspondence to the categories
for the other desktop environments we have (gnome, kde, xfce). With the
help of a few users I have been developing ebuilds for these packages in
the lx
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 12:05:54 +0100
Ben de Groot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to add a new category to the tree: lxde-base, to be used
> for the LXDE desktop [1,2] packages, in correspondence to the
> categories for the other desktop environments we have (gnome, kde,
> xfce).
Hi,
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to
> ask maintainers check if their current stable packages build with
> 4.3, and if not please stabilize a version that does in the near
> future if at all possible. Stabilizing this version is
Hi,
Robert Bridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> As a use who looked at LXDE for older machines, but decided that not
> to mess around with overlays on otherwise stable x86 boxes, can I
> vote for this?
You can, and I am sure you can also rely on that overlay to be in good
shape, so test it.
+1 by the
On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 12:05 +0100, Ben de Groot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to add a new category to the tree: lxde-base, to be used
> for the LXDE desktop [1,2] packages, in correspondence to the categories
> for the other desktop environments we have (gnome, kde, xfce). With the
> help of a fe
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:30:09 +0100
Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to
> > ask maintainers check if their current stable packages build with
> > 4.3, and if not please st
Ryan Hill wrote:
In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to ask
maintainers check if their current stable packages build with 4.3, and
if not please stabilize a version that does in the near future if at
all possible. Stabilizing this version is going to be a huge job du
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:42:27 +
Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dev-util/rej
Taken. Unavoidable really. :)
Kind regards,
jer
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:42:27 +
Daniel Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sys-block/viaideinfo
And that one.
rej
I'd like to get "distcc" added as one of the FEATURES we are able to RESTRICT.
It is true that RESTRICT="distcc" is usually not the proper solution to
problems. But in the case of out-of-tree kernel modules the idea of
distributing compile jobs to other machines is fundamentally flawed IMO.
A
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 13:57:17 -0700
Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But in the case of out-of-tree kernel modules the idea
> of distributing compile jobs to other machines is fundamentally
> flawed IMO.
Why? And how are out of tree kernel modules in any way special when it
comes to distcc?
If you're compiling an out-of-tree module that requires the kernel be compiled
with support for a particular item and the distccd host's kernel does not
have that support compiles fail. Reference bug #120001 (though I know that
it was properly diagnosed there).
Then there's also this doozie. -
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:21:43 -0700
Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you're compiling an out-of-tree module that requires the kernel be
> compiled with support for a particular item and the distccd host's
> kernel does not have that support compiles fail. Reference bug
> #120001 (though I
On Saturday, November 1, 2008 14:28:06 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:21:43 -0700
>
> Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you're compiling an out-of-tree module that requires the kernel be
> > compiled with support for a particular item and the distccd host's
> > kernel do
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:58:39 -0700
Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use madwifi-ng extensively and have experienced the same issue with
> madwifi-ng as stated in that bug. For bug #167844, please read
> comment #13 and http://code.google.com/p/distcc/issues/detail?id=25.
> There's nothin
On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 18:30:41 +0100
Jose Luis Rivero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > In anticipation of getting GCC 4.3 stabilized sometime, I'd like to
> > ask maintainers check if their current stable packages build with
> > 4.3, and if not please stabilize a version that does i
On Saturday, November 1, 2008 15:11:16 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:58:39 -0700
>
> Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I use madwifi-ng extensively and have experienced the same issue with
> > madwifi-ng as stated in that bug. For bug #167844, please read
> > comment #13
On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 15:47:09 -0700
Gordon Malm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It looks to me like hardened is doing entirely the wrong thing.
> > Thus, the proper fix is to make hardened behave itself.
>
> It looks to me like you've already made up your mind. How is
> hardened doing the entirely w
Gordon Malm wrote:
It looks to me like you've already made up your mind. How is hardened doing
the entirely wrong thing?
From the page [1] you mentioned:
"If so, that seems to me like an abuse of the -D option."
The abuse is in changing the compiler behavior based on -D options.
What do you
Ben de Groot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to add a new category to the tree: lxde-base, to be used
> for the LXDE desktop [1,2] packages, in correspondence to the categories
> for the other desktop environments we have (gnome, kde, xfce). With the
> help of a few users I have been developing ebui
On Saturday 01 November 2008 20:57:17 Gordon Malm wrote:
> I'd like to get "distcc" added as one of the FEATURES we are able to
> RESTRICT.
Regardless of whether it's a good idea or not, does it fix all the known
issues if the ebuild sets DISTCC_HOSTS="localhost" in the environment?
On Saturday, November 1, 2008 15:57:52 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Parallel building problems can often and should be addressed
> > properly. I don't want the answer to every one that comes along to
> > be to add RESTRICT="distcc". This is something to be addressed
> > through developer documentat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gordon Malm wrote:
All the technical discussion on the above is perfectly fine, but the way
the arguments are being presented and the tone used by both sides is
getting arguments into a thin line from becoming flames.
Please step back before turning
25 matches
Mail list logo
