Please review the following news item.
-
Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
Author: Michał Górny
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: -MM-DD
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
El lun, 13-10-2014 a las 11:35 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> Please review the following news item.
[...]
> The current eselect-bashcomp setup will *not* be migrated. It may be
> necessary to rebuild packages installing completions after the upgrade,
> and remove old configuration symlinks afterw
On 13/10/14 05:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Please review the following news item.
>
> -
>
> Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
> Author: Michał Górny
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Posted: -MM-DD
> Revision: 1
> News-Item-Format: 1.0
> Display-If-Installed:
> Starting with app-shells/bash-c
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:37:19AM -0400, Alex Xu wrote:
> On 13/10/14 05:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Please review the following news item.
> >
> > -
> >
> > Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
> > Author: Michał Górny
> > Content-Type: text/plain
> > Posted: -MM-DD
> > Revision: 1
> > Ne
Guilherme Amadio posted on Mon, 13 Oct 2014 09:52:11 -0300 as excerpted:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:37:19AM -0400, Alex Xu wrote:
>> On 13/10/14 05:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > Please review the following news item.
>> >
>> > -
>> >
>> > Title: bash-completion-2.1-r90
>> > Author: Micha
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> Many of our users do care what's going on, that's why they run gentoo,
> and for those that don't, a bit of extra information won't hurt 'em.
>
Sure, though it may help to format things from a more "actionable"
standpoint.
Michał Górny wrote:
> the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
Why is it desirable to make that change?
//Peter
pgpAbh_XiMjXl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos and
app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other stable packages,
app-text/dos2unix and net-dns/djbdns respectively.
Fortunately, both of them have had version/revision bumps since the
blocker so we can remove the blocker from the
(d)
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
On 13 October 2014 17:58, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos and
> app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other stable packages,
> app-text/dos2unix an
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Michał Górny wrote:
>> the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
>
> Why is it desirable to make that change?
>
>
> //Peter
Disregard previous fat-finger reply...
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Michał Górny wrote:
>> the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
>
> Why is it desirable to make that change?
>
See my previous email:
3. Unlike in the past, there is no longer a performance pena
On 10/13/14 12:58, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos and
app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other stable packages,
app-text/dos2unix and net-dns/djbdns respectively.
Fortunately, both of them have had version/revision bumps since the
b
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:02:55 -0400
"Anthony G. Basile" wrote:
> On 10/13/14 12:58, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> > I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos
> > and app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other stable packages,
> > app-text/dos2unix and net-dns/djbdns respecti
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 14:02:55 -0400
> "Anthony G. Basile" wrote:
>
>> On 10/13/14 12:58, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> > I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos
>> > and app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other
Hi,
In order to solve bug #503802 [1], I would like to add a
virtual/podofo-build package to pull in app-text/podofo and
dev-libs/boost. Then packages like app-text/calibre can put
virtual/podofo-build in DEPEND and app-text/podofo in RDEPEND. The
advantage of this approach is that it makes it pos
For compatibility and migration support, we've kept the old OpenLDAP
2.3.x ebuilds in the tree for nearly 5 years.
OpenLDAP-2.4.x first went to stable 2009/11/04.
package.mask has blocked
# Andreas K. Huettel (13 Oct 2014)
# Does not build with current CLucene (bug 420195); dead upstream.
# No consumers in the tree. Masked for removal in 30 days.
dev-perl/Lucene
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
signature.asc
Descript
Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
> >
> > Why is it desirable to make that change?
>
> there is no longer a performance penalty
There is a severe behavioral penalty!
> We think that most users will prefer to just leave everything enabled now.
I really do
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> I really do not want that to be chosen for me.
>
> Opt-out is not cool. :(
>
Well, then all you need to do is tell eselect to disable them, etc.
It always seemed pointless to me that there are a million bash
completion filters installed on
On 10/14/14 05:22, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> For compatibility and migration support, we've kept the old OpenLDAP
> 2.3.x ebuilds in the tree for nearly 5 years.
And you better keep them for a while, because some of us are stuck with
2.3, and mixed operation (e.g. master 2.4, slaves 2.3) is not s
Peter Stuge wrote:
> There is a severe behavioral penalty!
Rich Freeman wrote:
> > I really do not want that to be chosen for me.
>
> Well, then all you need to do is tell eselect to disable them, etc.
Well, but see above - this is a huge change in behavior - I really
don't think that should be
On Tue Oct 14 03:32:32 2014 Peter Stuge wrote:
> Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > > the new framework is opt-out rather than opt-in.
> > >
> > > Why is it desirable to make that change?
> >
> > there is no longer a performance penalty
>
> There is a severe behavioral penalty!
>
>
> > We think that m
22 matches
Mail list logo
