В Пнд, 28/12/2009 в 18:41 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan пишет:
> I think we can simply follow debian and fedora's lead on this. They
> have the lawyers, and
Well, it's possible but not that simple. To do this it's not enough to
compare packages, but files and patches should be compared as well (and
reas
В Втр, 29/12/2009 в 00:24 -0500, Vincent Launchbury пишет:
> > File a bug with some ebuilds.
>
> It looks like somebody already has. See
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=266157. I tested the latest
> ebuild, and it worked fine (see comment #59.) What would have to be
> done to get it in th
Hi,
Joe Sapp :
> Anyways, a diff would be useless so I've attached the proposed eclass
> [2].
Looks fine so far. What puzzled me is the documentation of the SLOT
variable. What is the motivation to do so?
* Sometimes you give a default on undefined ROOT variable, sometimes
not. Please make
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:31:44 +0100
Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Le 28/12/2009 22:04, Fabio Erculiani a écrit :
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:51 PM, David Leverton
> > wrote:
> >> On Monday 28 December 2009 20:50:17 Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> >>> What all this has to do with the fact that they are just
>
# Diego E. Pettenò (29 Dec 2009)
# on behalf of QA team
#
# Another of the Jörg Schilling “fast and enhanced” unix
# tools, fails to build with glibc 2.10 (bug #298879), will
# most likely file in other ways as that is fixed. Ignore
# CFLAGS (bug #241984). Ebuild is very sub-standard (never
# di
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Then there was no need to waste everyone's time with a backhanded
> comment about the X11 herd. And we can all get on with our lives.
>
>From your perspective it might've looked like a backhanded comment,
but I know that scarabeus and lxna
Am Freitag, den 25.12.2009, 19:09 +0100 schrieb Tobias Scherbaum:
> Am Dienstag, den 15.12.2009, 23:36 -0100 schrieb Jorge Manuel B. S.
> Vicetto:
> > nomination: December 17th to 30th
>
> I'd like to nominate dev-zero.
And I accept, thanks.
--
Tiziano Müller
Gentoo Linux Developer
Areas of res
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 12:02:14PM +0300, Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Втр, 29/12/2009 в 00:24 -0500, Vincent Launchbury пишет:
> > > File a bug with some ebuilds.
> >
> > It looks like somebody already has. See
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=266157. I tested the latest
> > ebuild, and it w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
# Jonathan Callen (29 Dec 2009)
# Project abandoned upstream (replaced by dev-util/schroot)
# Collides with dev-util/schroot[dchroot]
# Masked for removal in 30 days, bug 298874
sys-apps/dchroot
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GN
Le 29/12/2009 14:43, Henry Gebhardt a écrit :
> 4) add a USE-flag, say "devel", that, when enabled, allows
> compiling programs against the package. x11-libs/libXtst would
> have an RDEPEND like this:
> RDEPEND="devel? x11-libs/inputproto"
This doesn't solve anything. It will just annoy users as t
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 06:32:20PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Can we have USE-deps inside the LICENSE block then?
Yes.
~harring
pgphPPJZqEGs2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Hi folks,
Clutter is an opengl-based library for creating user interfaces.
http://www.clutter-project.org/
It is currently used by gnome-games-2.28.2, and GNOME 3.0 will make
extensive use of it. The Moblin project also uses clutter for parts of
it's interface.
The eclass is attached, and is ve
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 12:36:34AM -0500, Vincent Launchbury wrote:
> 1) Not all of the licenses are completely accurate. For example, the
> Linux kernels are listed as soley GPL-2, yet they contain blobs of
> non-free firmware.
The fact that some people claim that the firmware blobs somehow viola
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 08:16:22PM -0500, Richard Freeman wrote:
> On 12/28/2009 05:53 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> You're wrong there. The kernel does contain additional licenses, and
>> EXPLICITLY mentions them. Go and read 'firmware/WHENCE'.
>>
>> The licenses listed therein range from use-per
Greg KH wrote:
> The fact that some people claim that the firmware blobs somehow violate
> the GPLv2 license of the kernel is a claim, not a fact, so please do not
> state it as such.
Hi Greg,
Thanks for your reply.
I think you misunderstood my point though. I wasn't saying that the
firmware v
15 matches
Mail list logo
