Le 04/10/2010 08:35, Michał Górny a écrit :
> On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:00:22 +0200
> Rémi Cardona wrote:
>
>> #2a) pkg-config is one solution (what upstream Xorg says: "if you
>> want a static libX11, use pkg-config --static"), other teams/herds
>> could fix their packages' .pc files to correctly l
On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> as I've only recently "graduated to developer", I've got a question about
> this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always
> thought "Python, portage, and gcc are the things that I really need to rely
> on, so whatev
# Diego E. Pettenò (04 Oct 2010)
# on behalf of QA team
#
# Ironically, it is misusing autotools (bug #255831). It was
# added in 2004 and never version bumped since; autotools
# have since evolved a fair amount, while this is based
# still on automake 1.6. Avoid keeping it around.
#
# Removal o
On Mon, 04 Oct 2010 00:00:22 +0200
Rémi Cardona wrote:
> #2a) pkg-config is one solution (what upstream Xorg says: "if you
> want a static libX11, use pkg-config --static"), other teams/herds
> could fix their packages' .pc files to correctly list all required
> packages for proper static linking
On 10/04/2010 03:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> So - would it make sense to split repoman into its own ebuild?
++
I always did wonder why the two have been part of the same project.
Repoman updates could probably be stabilized more quickly with so much
worry about impact on users at large.
On 10/03/2010 09:26 PM, Duncan wrote:
> The problem is that "in-tree" is a reasonably bounded set of builds, while
> "out-of-tree" is unlimited. Practically speaking, I simply don't see how
> Gentoo can be concerned with "out-of-tree" in general.
If any other distro had that attitude Gentoo (an
Am I the only one who is waiting for a Portage 2.2 unmask on ~arch?
It's taking months if not years ;-)
--
Fabio Erculiani
# Ricardo Mendoza (04 Oct 2010)
# Dead upstream, project no longer exists and doesn't work.
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
net-misc/metacafe-dl
On 10/04/2010 08:45 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> Am I the only one who is waiting for a Portage 2.2 unmask on ~arch?
> It's taking months if not years ;-)
Well, portage-2.1.9.x is essentially the same codebase as "portage-2.2".
If you look at the 2.1.9 branch, you can see that it diverges and at t
On 10/04/2010 12:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>
> On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> as I've only recently "graduated to developer", I've got a question about
>> this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always
>> thought "Python, portage, and gc
Hey there,
like etc-update and dispatch-conf _conf-update_ seems to be one of the
more central tools in Gentoo.
I have the impression that it is unmaintained because...
- metadata.xml says maintainer-needed, and
- upstream seems to be a single _retired_ Gentoo dev, only.
There is lots of smalle
Il giorno lun, 04/10/2010 alle 11.19 -0400, Richard Freeman ha scritto:
>
> That said, supporting this use case should not interfere with more
> mainstream use of the distro. I like the USE flag proposal because it
> lets us have our cake and eat it too. Those who don't need .la files
> don't ge
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 19.54 +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
ha scritto:
>
> With that goal in mind, I'd like to ask anyone with arguments about
> this
> issue to present them as a reply to this thread.
I'm going instead to link my latest blog post on the matter where I
summarised most
Zac Medico posted on Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:40:29 -0700 as excerpted:
> On 10/04/2010 12:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>>
>> On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>> [Portage is something] that I really need to rely on,
>>> so whatever I do, I'll keep [it] stable.
>>>
>>> (My deve
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 20:47:38 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> >> for i in $( ls 2>/dev/null ); do
[...]
> A nice way around this is to do the following:
>
> ls -1 | while read i; do
What pva carelessly omitted to point out was that using ls(1) is
incredibly bad bash programmin
Richard Freeman posted on Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:19:29 -0400 as excerpted:
> On 10/03/2010 09:26 PM, Duncan wrote:
>> The problem is that "in-tree" is a reasonably bounded set of builds,
>> while "out-of-tree" is unlimited. Practically speaking, I simply don't
>> see how Gentoo can be concerned with
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 04:13:04 +0200
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> I'm going instead to link my latest blog post on the matter where I
> summarised most of the points. Why a blog post? Because so I have it
> available as reference for the future together with all the others.
> Don't like that? Sorry,
On 10/04/2010 09:13 PM, Duncan wrote:
> Zac Medico posted on Mon, 04 Oct 2010 10:40:29 -0700 as excerpted:
>
>> On 10/04/2010 12:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
[Portage is something] that I really need to rely on,
so whatever
18 matches
Mail list logo
