My best wishes for this new stage.
Regards
On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 04:57:09PM +0200, Jos?? Fournier wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have been a bit far from Gentoo for a rather long time now. I joined
> Gentoo in 2013 and I used to be a translator for the French language. At
> this time, I had to b
On 02/05/16 05:27 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
> Let me know offline if/when you need a beta tester. I have QEMU and
> an ancient 32-bit-only Atom netbook that could really use a smaller
> libc.
>
Is musl a good choice perhaps? iirc it's support right now is better
than uclibc...
signa
On Sun, May 01, 2016 at 04:57:09PM +0200, José Fournier wrote:
> I have been a bit far from Gentoo for a rather long time now. I joined
> Gentoo in 2013 and I used to be a translator for the French language. At
> this time, I had to become a developer in order to be able to submit my
> work in the
I think the deal breaker for some people using uclibc over musl is being
able to choose to include individual components to make it even smaller.
Another possibility why is musl doesn't straight drop in replace all of
glibc's non posix quirks that legacy software depends on could make for
some trou
On Sun, 1 May 2016 16:16:59 -0700
Daniel Campbell wrote:
> On 05/01/2016 07:03 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 1. Mai 2016, 15:32:27 schrieb Jeroen Roovers:
> >> On Sat, 30 Apr 2016 23:16:42 +0200
> >
> > (For the record, hppa is definitely NOT the problem.)
> >
> Forgive me
Hi,
I'm still searching for the reason why I'm not seeing my eclass
modifications... no luck so far.
What can I do to debug portage's behavior?
Thank you
En date de : Sam 30.4.16, Farid BENAMROUCHE a écrit :
Objet: Re : Cannot see my eclass modif
> On May 3, 2016, at 5:42 PM, Farid BENAMROUCHE wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm still searching for the reason why I'm not seeing my eclass
> modifications... no luck so far.
>
> What can I do to debug portage's behavior?
>
> Thank you
>
>
> En date de :
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Farid BENAMROUCHE wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm still searching for the reason why I'm not seeing my eclass
> modifications... no luck so far.
>
> What can I do to debug portage's behavior?
>
> Thank you
>
>
> En date de : Sam 30
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> The solution is to have people with an actual interest in a specific
> architecture determine whether stabilising a package is viable, and
> taking sensible action, like dropping stable keywords where applicable.
If these people do not actua
Hi there,
I've been working on the transition from #!/sbin/runscript to
#!/sbin/openrc-run [1], by starting on the maintainer-needed packages.
That's done (aside from some stabilizations needed, but I'll deal with that
latter). The trouble is that there are roughly 700 packages that need to
be upd
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
>> The solution is to have people with an actual interest in a specific
>> architecture determine whether stabilising a package is viable, and
>> taking sensible action, like dropping stabl
On 4 May 2016 at 16:46, Matt Turner wrote:
> Having built many stages for an "unstable" arch (mips) has taught me
> one thing: it's awful being unstable-only. There's no end to the
> compilation failures and other such headaches, none of which have
> anything at all to do with the specific archite
On 05/04/2016 06:27 AM, Austin English wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I've been working on the transition from #!/sbin/runscript to
> #!/sbin/openrc-run [1],
... and once more I have to ask:
Is there any reason that Stuff Needs To Change because of a packaging
conflict in *debian* where it really doesn't
On 05/04/2016 01:02 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 05/04/2016 06:27 AM, Austin English wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I've been working on the transition from #!/sbin/runscript to
>> #!/sbin/openrc-run [1],
> ... and once more I have to ask:
>
> Is there any reason that Stuff Needs To Change because of a
14 matches
Mail list logo
