On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:06:03 -0400
"Walter Dnes" wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:14:31AM -0400, Olivier Cr?te wrote
>
> > We're imposing our deep integration because it's the only way to
> > make a compelling platform that "just works", forcing users to tell
> > the computer something the co
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:49:19 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23:00:23 +0530
> Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > Then please continue with udev in package.mask and kindly stop
> > trying to impose your workflow on the rest of the world.
>
> Isn't the point here that the desktop / GN
Sorry for being completely OT now, will be the only mail on this from my
side...
On Thursday, 13. October 2011 18:05:47 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:14:31 -0400
>
> Olivier Crête wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 18:49 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 23
On 15.10.2011 10:42, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
> in what way will exherbo deal wih this mess? Are there any plans?
We don't support /usr on a separate partition. People can, of course, do
that and I'll point them to dracut for creating an initramfs.
Or they can do whatever works for them. Peo
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> On 15.10.2011 10:42, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
>> in what way will exherbo deal wih this mess? Are there any plans?
>
> We don't support /usr on a separate partition. People can, of course, do
> that and I'll point them to dracut for cr
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:13 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
>> On 15.10.2011 10:42, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
>>> in what way will exherbo deal wih this mess? Are there any plans?
>>
>> We don't support /usr on a separate partition. Pe
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:54, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> That would be an ok approach from my perspective: We could just change
> line 14 of python.eclass and let package maintainers report breakage as
> they increment EAPI. I am confident that nothing EAPI <= 3 would break.
>
> Is anyone (especially
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On 10/14/2011 09:11 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> On 10/14/11 5:38 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>>> I believe op's point is that there is no one to escalate the problem
>>> to; certainly the council members are not going to do the work
>>> thems
On 10/14/2011 04:59 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 01:01:50 +0300
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>> Title: Upgrade to libpng15
>> Author: Samuli Suominen
>> Content-Type: text/plain
>> Posted: 2011-10-14
>> Revision: 1
>> News-Item-Format: 1.0
>> Display-If-Installed: >
>> After upgradin
On 10/14/2011 11:48 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El vie, 14-10-2011 a las 01:01 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
>> small news item for stable users. lets keep it simple...
>>
>
> Is early rebuilding of gdk-pixbuf still needed now that fixed version
> will be stabilized before libpng15?
The blockers
On Saturday 15 October 2011 03:29:54 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:06:03 -0400 "Walter Dnes" wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:14:31AM -0400, Olivier Cr?te wrote
> > > We're imposing our deep integration because it's the only way to
> > > make a compelling platform that "just wor
El sáb, 15-10-2011 a las 19:35 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 10/14/2011 11:48 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El vie, 14-10-2011 a las 01:01 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> >> small news item for stable users. lets keep it simple...
> >>
> >
> > Is early rebuilding of gdk-pixbuf still needed
On Saturday, October 15, 2011 09:29:54 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 00:06:03 -0400
>
> "Walter Dnes" wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:14:31AM -0400, Olivier Cr?te wrote
> >
> > > We're imposing our deep integration because it's the only way to
> > > make a compelling platfor
On 10/15/11 2:42 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:54, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> That would be an ok approach from my perspective: We could just change
>> line 14 of python.eclass and let package maintainers report breakage as
>> they increment EAPI. I am confident that nothing
On 10/16/2011 12:00 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 10/15/11 2:42 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 03:54, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>> That would be an ok approach from my perspective: We could just change
>>> line 14 of python.eclass and let package maintainers report breakage
On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 19:17:17 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Ocne you have identified the broken files, you can either delete them,
^
> edit them in place and replace png14 with png15, or re-emerge the packages
Otherwise good.
--
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it
On 10/16/2011 12:43 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 19:17:17 +0300
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>> Ocne you have identified the broken files, you can either delete them,
>^
>> edit them in place and replace png14 with png15, or re-emerge the packages
>
> Otherwise good.
>
>
Thank
On 10/15/2011 01:57 AM, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> On 15.10.2011 10:42, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
>> in what way will exherbo deal wih this mess? Are there any plans?
>
> We don't support /usr on a separate partition. People can, of course, do
> that and I'll point them to dracut for creating an
18 matches
Mail list logo
