> On Sat, 4 Apr 2015, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 21:36:37
> Ulrich Mueller napisał(a):
>> But in the worst case, your "hack" can cause a broken dependency
>> graph. On the one hand, above mentioned >=app-misc/foo-1:0 matches
>> all versions affected by the slotmove, so it
On 04/05/2015 06:44 AM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 01:31:53PM +0200, hasufell wrote:
>
>> Not anymore. We will go for "libressl" USE flag for the same reason
>> there is a "libav" USE flag now (working subslots etc).
>
> Um, ok. That still only allows one or the other to be i
# James Le Cuirot (05 Apr 2015)
# A 32-on-64 Java VM is no longer considered necessary and a multilib
# icedtea-bin would be preferred anyway. sun-j2me-bin depends on this
# but it has been superseded by Oracle's JME and I doubt we'll ever
# need that either. Removal in 30 days.
app-emulation/emul
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Paul B. Henson wrote:
>
> They're pretty much decided on allowing both openssl and libressl to be
> installed concurrently and for a given application to use one or the
> other. The specific method for that packaging system is what they call a
> prefix; basically i
On 04/05/2015 01:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> If you're going to fork a library, and don't intend to keep the
> packages API-compatible, then change the filenames. What is so hard
> about this? LIbressl was even an outside fork, so it didn't come with
> any of the baggage of "we're the real libs
On 5 April 2015 at 05:44, Paul B. Henson wrote:
> I guess I'll just let this simmer for now and see how things develop. My
> preference (I think, at least at the moment) would be for both
> implementations to be able to coexist, like openssl and gnutls. It looks
> like that's the way it's heading
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
>
> Since as you point out the two packages are vastly API compatible, it makes
> them ABI incompatible and conflicting.
++
If they really want to improve the security of function calls that
they consider inherently secure, they should ju
On Sun, 5 Apr 2015 04:12:17 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Thomas D. posted on Sat, 04 Apr 2015 22:09:36 +0200 as excerpted:
>
> > Title: New net-firewall/shorewall all-in-one package
>
>
> But I'm not wedded to either idea; they're just what I came up with
> off the top of
On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 08:49:51PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2015-04-04, o godz. 13:47:47
> Alex Brandt napisał(a):
>
> > On Saturday, April 04, 2015 14:41:37 Philip Webb wrote:
> > > I read the recent thread re the new app-eselect.
> > > Doing my weekly system update,
> > > it strikes me
Hello all,
Firstly, I would like to take this opportunity to remind all devs
touching ebuilds with Java .jar dependencies about the importance of
restricting these dependencies to specific SLOTs.
There is no cross-platform or even platform-specific location for
Java .jar files so each distro tend
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
> My preferred solution would be
> create a revbump that solely amends (R)DEPEND, leaving the KEYWORDS
> exactly as they are.
Sounds good to me (as long as repoman agrees :).
- --
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> TL;DR: (1) Please consider either making Documentation a top-level-menu
> link (preferable), or at least change Support to Support and
> Documentation. (2) On the documentation lander page, add a "one big
> list" link to a br
Hi,
This is quite a Portage patch topic but since devs are known to be
unhappy about any change, I would like to start a bikeshed first.
The idea is to make repoman/pcheck complain if the newest ebuild
matched by version+slot restriction of dependency atom can't satisfy
the USE dependency, or in
On Sun, 5 Apr 2015 18:50:10 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> What are your thoughts?
if the version+slot restriction on foo in bar-1.ebuild contains foo
packages that don't have bar useflag then it's an error in
bar-1.ebuild (I think pms is pretty clear about this)
Alexis.
> On Sun, 5 Apr 2015, Michał Górny wrote:
> This is quite a Portage patch topic but since devs are known to be
> unhappy about any change, I would like to start a bikeshed first.
> The idea is to make repoman/pcheck complain if the newest ebuild
> matched by version+slot restriction of depend
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 6:50 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> What are your thoughts?
Sounds useful to me!
Cheers,
Dirkjan
Dnia 2015-04-05, o godz. 19:32:01
Ulrich Mueller napisał(a):
> > On Sun, 5 Apr 2015, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > This is quite a Portage patch topic but since devs are known to be
> > unhappy about any change, I would like to start a bikeshed first.
>
> > The idea is to make repoman/pcheck co
On 04/05/2015 03:25 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
> wrote:
>>
>> Since as you point out the two packages are vastly API compatible, it makes
>> them ABI incompatible and conflicting.
>
> ++
>
> If they really want to improve the security of function
On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 2:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
>
> You are ranting at the wrong place. If you want to make a difference,
> take this to the openbsd mailing lists.
>
It seems unlikely that this would make much of a difference. I think
that allowing this package to create another ffmpeg vs libav
On 5 April 2015 at 19:59, Rich Freeman wrote:
> It seems unlikely that this would make much of a difference. I think
> that allowing this package to create another ffmpeg vs libav mess is a
> mistake.
To be honest, the upstream developers should be fairly in the known
regarding my opinion expres
On 04/05/2015 08:59 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 2:35 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>
>> You are ranting at the wrong place. If you want to make a difference,
>> take this to the openbsd mailing lists.
>>
>
> It seems unlikely that this would make much of a difference.
It doesn't make
Our bug queue has 81 bugs!
If you have some spare time, please help assign/sort a few bugs.
To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5
Thanks!
Published a slightly improved version now:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gentoo-news.git/tree/2015/2015-04-06-apache-addhandler-addtype
If there's anything wrong with it, please mail me directly (or put me in
CC) so there is zero chance of slipping through. Thanks!
Best,
Sebastian
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2015-04-05 23:59 UTC.
Removals:
media-plugins/vdr-pcd 2015-03-30 13:33:19
hd_brummy
app-admin/eselect-audicle 2015-03-31 20
# Maciej Mrozowski (06 Apr 2015)
# Does not link against latest ncurses and no interest to fix it.
# Superseded by LVM2 and all clusters should be migrated by now.
# Removal in 30 days.
sys-fs/evms
I kept it in tree for a while longer for volumes migration purpose, but all
good things must come
Daniel Campbell posted on Sat, 04 Apr 2015 22:58:40 -0700 as excerpted:
> Aside from the Devmanual, most of Gentoo's docs are on the wiki, so you
> could make a bookmark and setup a search shortcut for it. Just bookmark
> the following address in Firefox:
>
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/index.php?sea
Sebastian Pipping posted on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 01:29:19 +0200 as excerpted:
> Published a slightly improved version now:
>
> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gentoo-news.git/tree/2015/2015-04-06-
apache-addhandler-addtype
>
> If there's anything wrong with it, please mail me directly (or put me in
>
Alec Warner posted on Sun, 05 Apr 2015 09:33:24 -0700 as excerpted:
> No need to shout.
Apology to you and others. And thanks.
While I am of course familiar with CAPS=shout, I always considered it
entire phrases or whole sentences in caps, not single words, which was
simply emphasis.
But it
On 30 March 2015 at 00:23, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2015-03-30, o godz. 00:07:16
>
> Include example code.
>
Updated version:
Title: FFmpeg default
Author: Ben de Groot
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2015-04-07
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: media-video/ffmpeg
Displ
29 matches
Mail list logo
