Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gentoo-x86/dev-libs/libffi: ChangeLog libffi-3.0.10_rc8.ebuild libffi-3.0.9.ebuild

2011-09-09 Thread Marijn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/08/11 13:54, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 09/06/2011 11:31 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: >> On 06-09-2011 20:24:54 +, Samuli Suominen wrote: >>> Modified: ChangeLog Removed: libffi-3.0.10_rc8.ebuild >>> libffi-3.0.9.ebuild Log: [This is a placehol

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Committing packages with unfetchable sources [sys-devel/gdb-7.3.1]

2011-09-09 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2011/9/9 Mike Frysinger : > On Wednesday, September 07, 2011 03:20:01 Tomáš Chvátal wrote: >> please stop committing packages that is not possible to fetch right away. >> You can pick from three options: >> a) stop using mirrors://gentoo/ and put it on dev.gentoo.org to your >> public_html like mos

Re: [gentoo-dev] About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options

2011-09-09 Thread Pacho Ramos
El mié, 31-08-2011 a las 23:36 +0200, Michał Górny escribió: > On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 21:24:25 +0200 > Pacho Ramos wrote: > > > I won't be able to reply to this thread for now, but would like to ask > > about how to handle cases like: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=381355 > > Either yo

Re: [gentoo-dev] About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options

2011-09-09 Thread Pacho Ramos
El mié, 31-08-2011 a las 18:29 -0400, Aaron W. Swenson escribió: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 08/31/2011 03:24 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > I won't be able to reply to this thread for now, but would like to > > ask about how to handle cases like: > > https://bugs.gento

Re: [gentoo-dev] About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options

2011-09-09 Thread Alexis Ballier
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:14:41 +0200 Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Well, in this case it is simply appending "-g" when building with > debugging support, and it doesn't seem to cause any problem :-/ -g shouldnt change anything since binaries are stripped afterwards; if the useflag only adds -g then you s

Re: [gentoo-dev] About upstreams appending additional CFLAGS when building with some configure options

2011-09-09 Thread Pacho Ramos
El vie, 09-09-2011 a las 12:23 -0300, Alexis Ballier escribió: > On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:14:41 +0200 > Pacho Ramos wrote: > > > > Well, in this case it is simply appending "-g" when building with > > debugging support, and it doesn't seem to cause any problem :-/ > > -g shouldnt change anything s

[gentoo-dev] punt app-arch/cpio from system

2011-09-09 Thread Mike Frysinger
anyone have a good reason for keeping cpio around in the system profile ? -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] punt app-arch/cpio from system

2011-09-09 Thread Mike Gilbert
On 9/9/2011 2:47 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > anyone have a good reason for keeping cpio around in the system profile ? > -mike The only uses I have seen for cpio are: 1. Working with initramfs archives Genkernel already has the correct dep. Does dracut need it? 2. Extracting rpm files (rpm2cpio

Re: [gentoo-dev] punt app-arch/cpio from system

2011-09-09 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 03:11:01PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On 9/9/2011 2:47 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > anyone have a good reason for keeping cpio around in the system profile ? > > -mike > The only uses I have seen for cpio are: > > 1. Working with initramfs archives > > Genkernel already

Re: [gentoo-dev] punt app-arch/cpio from system

2011-09-09 Thread Amadeusz Żołnowski
Excerpts from Robin H. Johnson's message of 2011-09-09 22:25:59 +0200: > On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 03:11:01PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On 9/9/2011 2:47 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > anyone have a good reason for keeping cpio around in the system profile ? > > > -mike > > The only uses I have