Nathan L. Adams wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephen P. Becker wrote:
So you installed your server without reading *any* documenation? (Don't
lie). And you expect that the average user installs a Gentoo server
without at least referencing the documentation? Pa-leaze.
Jakub Moc wrote:
19.11.2005, 0:58:29, Grant Goodyear wrote:
My preference is that the subdomain chosen should succinctly reflect the role
that arch testers serve. My personal preference would be to choose something
like "aide", "helper", "assistant", or something similar. (Indeed, I'd have
Grant Goodyear wrote:
Jakub Moc wrote: [Fri Nov 18 2005, 06:07:48PM CST]
19.11.2005, 0:58:29, Grant Goodyear wrote:
My preference is that the subdomain chosen should succinctly reflect
the role that arch testers serve. My personal preference would be
to choose something like "aide",
Grant Goodyear wrote:
Lance Albertson wrote: [Fri Nov 18 2005, 05:46:47PM CST]
Anyways, I don't see any problem with us giving them straight up
[EMAIL PROTECTED] aliases. They won't have shell access, nor cvs so we
don't have to worry about that. This makes it very simple for us infra
folks
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 03:27:13 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| 19.11.2005, 3:07:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Sure, recognise their contributions, by giving them credit in
| > ChangeLogs.
|
| How exactly does testing stuff fit into *changelogs*, have I missed
Lance Albertson wrote:
Curtis Napier wrote:
If you have access to a Macintosh, Windows, *BSD or any other OS or
Browser please test the site and include your OS and the browser version
in your feedback. I haven't received feedback from Konqueror or Safari
so feedback from those browsers wou
Grant Goodyear wrote:
It's interesting to compare http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org/ with
http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/mainindex.html. One of the things that I
always liked about the original design was the fact that the front page
held a considerable amount of information without needing much ve
Hello everyone,
A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are still
listed i
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 02:18, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
Hello everyone,
A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned
Marius Mauch wrote:
If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
to deal with this?
Don't do this without explicitly checking with the maintainer for a
package (if existant). Generally redund
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 08:29:36PM -0800, Tuan Van wrote:
Luis F. Araujo wrote:
Hello everyone,
A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
please adjust your script
Marius Mauch wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 08:26:03 +0200
Alin Nastac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Marius Mauch wrote:
If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
to deal with this?
Do
Matthias Langer wrote:
On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 21:31 +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote:
On Saturday 03 of December 2005 21:26 Matthias Langer wrote:
1.) If you remove gcc-3.3* before emerge -e system you will be left
behind with a broken python and therefore emerge. Thus i think there
should be a
Matthias Langer wrote:
On Sat, 2005-12-03 at 14:04 -0700, Joshua Baergen wrote:
Matthias Langer wrote:
2.) emerge -e world on a system with lot of packages will most likley
fail somewhere during the process for various reasons. Fixig the problem
(for example by unmerging the package wh
Bret Towe wrote:
On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 19:17:05 -0800 Bret Towe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On 12/24/05, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > This isn't politics, but copyright infringement on top of a
| > ridiculous license (wh
Spider (DmD Lj) wrote:
On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 10:35 +0100, Alexandre Buisse wrote:
After my last sync, I have this new block between evince and xpdf, which
is a problem at least to me.
Isn't there any way to make xpdf and poppler live together on the same
system?
Yeah. : )
See, p
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Tuesday 03 January 2006 04:30, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
Now if i change to >=app-text/xpdf-3.01-r4 , it works just fine.
But you significantly change its meaning.
I am not sure what it is happening here though... is the !<
Mike Frysinger wrote:
>On Thursday 21 April 2005 03:19 pm, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 10:09:16PM +0300, Juha Varkki wrote:
>>
>>
>>>bc? Do you mean /usr/bin/bc or did I miss something?
>>>Why on earth are you taking it out?
>>>I use bc quite often actually ..
>>
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Luis F. Araujo wrote:
>
>
>>Nobody is forcing. I think it is better/easier to keep the package
>>than tracking/adding a lot of dependencies in the ebuilds.
>>
>>
>
>S
dev-lang/squeak
dev-lang/squeak-basicimage
dev-lang/squeak-fullimage
Though im not a squeak expert, ive used it myself several times, so,
If nobody else wants these, i can take care of them.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Greetings,
I was just checking this morning the dev-lang/ category, and
i didn't see the dylan programming language around. was it removed?
Also, would anybody like to take care of dev-lang/smalltalkx ?
It is very out-of-date, and the installation of the latest versions aren't
easy to follow thr
Markus Nigbur wrote:
>Hi gang,
>
>I just (again) noticed I'm currently the only active developer of the
>desktop-misc herd, which is going to change as soon as the recruitment
>process is reopened again.
>About 80% of all bugs assigned to desktop-misc are new ebuild
>submissions for software which
Hello.
After some weeks of testing, and solving several issues to get
the gwydion-dylan compiler working, ive finally committed it
to the tree (package masked of course).
Briefly explained, the d2c compiler needs to be bootstrapped,
and they use Mindy (a interpreter) to do it, and need to be run
Mike Doty wrote:
Everyone welcome our newest minion: MetalGOD. Luis joins us to help out
with the printing herd and amd64 keywording. He also has his eyes on
the GDP project. I'll let him introduce himself.
"My name is Luis Medinas i'm a Physics Engineering student from
University of Aveiro,
Hello,
I am writing this email to ask for opinions and discuss some issues
of the SmallTalk packages that we have in the tree.
We currently have the following smalltalk implementations in the tree (STI):
dev-lang/gnu-smalltalk
dev-lang/smalltalkx
dev-lang/squeak
dev-lang/squeak-basicimage
dev-l
Greetings all,
So, as nobody came up with any suggestion/comment about my
last email, im gonna proceed to update the smalltalkx/ package
to the latest available binary version within the next 48 hours.
You can still ping me here on list or IRC within this period
if you got any better idea to han
Nathan L. Adams wrote:
What I see with Gentoo is this 'cathedral' being built where only those
folks who have been 'approved' or 'blessed' as being l33t enough are
allowed to review the code and actually cause a positive change when
some bug is found. If you believe Chris Gianelloni's argument,
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 00:28 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
- base doesnt define any USE
- default-linux defines a few local xorg USE (because no one has given us the
ability to control default USE via IUSE yet :P)
{x86,amd64}/make.defaults has the 'bloated' USE becau
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 21:30 -0500, Kito wrote:
So yeah, subprofiles, reasons why not?
Aside from the work involved, I see no reason to not use the cascades
for what they seem to be made for.
As I understood it, they were implemented to reduce the amoun
Brian Harring wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 05:43:35PM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Re: not shoving work onto you, complicating your job, etc, I agree,
and actually is what I was getting at in the badly worded section
below
My point is pretty simple,
why should we spend a bunch of ti
Stephen P. Becker wrote:
Is it just me, it seems that only sparc/mips devs want that kind of
change and non none of the x86/amd64 devs...
I still dont see what practical advantage that would bring to x86/amd64
users or developers?
If you haven't figured out the reason we are pushing for this
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On 5/9/2005 1:29:57, Ciaran McCreesh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 1:12:54 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| 3) All packages need to be assigned an x86 arch team member
|responsible.
Why?
Because if only the x86 arch team ca
Mike Doty wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Luis F. Araujo wrote:
| Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
|
|> On 5/9/2005 1:29:57, Ciaran McCreesh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
|>
|>
|>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 1:12:54 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 22:46 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote:
Stuart Herbert wrote:
I've no personal problem with arch teams sometimes needing to do their
own thing, provided it's confined to a specific class of package.
Outside of the core packages required to boot
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 12:25 -0400, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 22:46 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote:
Stuart Herbert wrote:
I've no personal problem with arch teams sometimes needing to do thei
35 matches
Mail list logo
