-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mr. Aaron W. Swenson schrieb:
>> P.S. would be nice to have a wd_WD.UTF-8 with WD standing for
>> world, just a country is so 1900
>>
>
> wd_WD.UTF-8 is certainly a no go. WD doesn't match any ISO country
> code. To support it, we'd have to create t
On 20/02/2012 07:47, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 20-02-2012 03:07:33 +, Kerin Millar wrote:
I know that adding LANG=POSIX doesn't do anything in this case but I
have a feeling that its presence would be instructive to new users. If a
user is asked to configure something which isn't present, it
On 02/20/2012 05:57 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
scarabeus12/02/20 15:57:31
Modified: libiodbc-3.52.7-r1.ebuild ChangeLog
Log:
Use single thread build as it is broken in paralel on some machines wrt
bug#405029.
(Portage version: 2.2.0_alpha87/cvs/Linux x86_6
Hi,
Since I plan to use the remote remote-id tag for euscan, and I already
use SRC_URI but I'd like all ebuild to use mirrors, I've wrote to
scripts to cleanup your ebuilds and metadata.
There are available here: https://github.com/iksaif/portage-janitor
Here is what you can do with them:
python r
Maybe it's time to just punt svgalib? There are only 46 ebuilds that
use it (some, optionally).
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> You can see current opened bugs for svgalib here:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=media-libs%
> 2Fsvgalib;list_id=8127
El lun, 20-02-2012 a las 17:57 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 02/20/2012 05:57 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
> > scarabeus12/02/20 15:57:31
> >
> >Modified: libiodbc-3.52.7-r1.ebuild ChangeLog
> >Log:
> >Use single thread build as it is broken in paralel on
El lun, 20-02-2012 a las 13:09 -0500, Michael Sterrett escribió:
> Maybe it's time to just punt svgalib? There are only 46 ebuilds that
> use it (some, optionally).
>
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > You can see current opened bugs for svgalib here:
> > htt
On 02/20/2012 09:36 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El lun, 20-02-2012 a las 17:57 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
On 02/20/2012 05:57 PM, Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
scarabeus12/02/20 15:57:31
Modified: libiodbc-3.52.7-r1.ebuild ChangeLog
Log:
Use single thread build
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:58:06 +0100
Piotr Szymaniak wrote:
> localepurge will be removed from portage [1]. As I was (/am) heavy
> user of it I found it funny that "linguas takes care of the proper
> locale installation" [2]. Maybe it should, but there's some major
> failure in lots of packages.
I
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> The problem is that users CCed on their bug reports have provided
> patches and fixes for them and would probably get angry if we punt them
> without even applying the patches to the tree (but I don't want to
> commit them as I cannot even test
I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
stabilization)?
I have read hardmask message but it simply explains that it's masked for
testing purposes :-/
Thanks a lot for the info
signature.asc
Description: This i
On 20.02.2012 21:34, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
> preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
> stabilization)?
>
> I have read hardmask message but it simply explains that it's masked for
> testing purposes :-/
>
> Thank
El lun, 20-02-2012 a las 21:41 +0100, Justin escribió:
> On 20.02.2012 21:34, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
> > preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
> > stabilization)?
> >
> > I have read hardmask message but it sim
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:00:31 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Yes, please. Once these get fixed then we can drop localepurge.
That's a lot of bugs to fix, and the way LINGUAS now works, we could
at least do with a QA check that helps figure out which packages break
when new translations are added to ne
We had a chat about this in #gentoo-dev the other night. I might come
up with a solution as part of the ZFS stuff that I am doing, but it
won't happen for at least a month.
With that said, it doesn't look like GRUB is the only blocker:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=gcc-4.6
On Mon, Feb
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> About this, I would also like to know if we are allowed to use
>> "MAKEOPTS +=..." (and the same for other variables in ebuild)
>> instead or it should be avoided for some reason.
> += wasn't allowed because it isn't compatible with bash-3.1 (a
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:00:31 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>
>> Yes, please. Once these get fixed then we can drop localepurge.
>
> That's a lot of bugs to fix, and the way LINGUAS now works, we could
> at least do with a QA check that helps fi
>
> Bleh, looks like grub is blocking this :(, will need to wait then (or
> maybe move to grub2 ;))
Yeah... anyone helping to debug this tricky thingy [*] is likely welcome.
Would like to help, but cant do much atm because of real-life work load...
[*] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
> preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
> stabilization)?
>
> I have read hardmask message but it simply explains that it's masked for
> testing purpose
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
>> I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
>> preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
>> stabilization)?
>>
>> I have read hardmask message b
On 02/20/2012 05:03 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
>> I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
>> preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
>> stabilization)?
>>
>> I have read hardmask message but it sim
On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 19:03 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> > I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
> > preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a near
> > stabilization)?
> >
> > I have read hardmask m
Ryan,
I took a look at the problem cited in your bug report. I suggest
compiling sys-boot/grub with CFLAGS="-O0 -ggdb3", attaching gdb to
grub-install and then watching what happens in the debugger. If you
compare runs with a GCC 4.5.3 built stage2 and a GCC 4.6.2 built
stage2, you should be able
> I took a look at the problem cited in your bug report. I suggest
> compiling sys-boot/grub with CFLAGS="-O0 -ggdb3", attaching gdb to
> grub-install and then watching what happens in the debugger. If you
> compare runs with a GCC 4.5.3 built stage2 and a GCC 4.6.2 built
> stage2, you should be ab
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 20:30:40 -0500
Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-20 at 19:03 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Grub is the only blocker. I don't want to unmask something that makes
> > people's systems unbootable.
> >
> > I'm also out of ideas and open to suggestions.
> gcc is slot
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 17:17:30 -0800
Zac Medico wrote:
> On 02/20/2012 05:03 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100
> > Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >
> >> I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are
> >> preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6 (and think on a ne
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 20:37:39 -0500
Richard Yao wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> I took a look at the problem cited in your bug report. I suggest
> compiling sys-boot/grub with CFLAGS="-O0 -ggdb3", attaching gdb to
> grub-install and then watching what happens in the debugger. If you
> compare runs with a GCC
27 matches
Mail list logo
