On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > the issue has been taken care of
>
> You have a conflict of interest in this one. What do other Council
> members who aren't games team members think?
perhaps you should try reading the bug
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally
On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Jan Kundrát kirjoitti:
> > Petteri Räty wrote:
> >> -2006-05-02
> >> +$DATE: $
> >
> > Please revert all date changes you've made for following reasons:
>
> Maybe next time comment on the original patch to avoid pointless work.
was this reply really
On Thursday 03 May 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> DISCLAIMER: I've not read the bug mentioned as I've lost the email
> with it's number so I may just be talking out of my ass.
there's nothing of value in said bug so having not read it is OK
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
On Friday 04 May 2007, Torsten Veller wrote:
> What is with prepalldocs?
some people like to install files into /usr/share/doc/$PF/ and not have it be
compressed
> Is it allowed to use in ebuilds? Should it be in pms?
yes
> Or is it just missing in prepall?
no
-mike
signature.asc
Descripti
On Friday 04 May 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Torsten Veller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What is with prepalldocs? Is it allowed to use in ebuilds? Should it
> > be in pms? Or is it just missing in prepall?
>
> The prep* functions are Portage internals. They're not suitable for
> ebuild use an
On Saturday 05 May 2007, Zac Medico wrote:
> Should we ban the _p0 suffix from the
> tree or should be change the version comparison behavior so that
> implicit _p0 is less than explicit _p0?
4 < 4_p < 4_p0 < 4_p1
how that gets accomplished is up to you Zac ;)
-mike
signature.asc
Description: T
On Wednesday 02 May 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 01 May 2007, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> > > There was some discussion about forcing/not forcing tests in
> > > EAPI-1, but there was clearly no compromise
On Sunday 06 May 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 05 May 2007, Zac Medico wrote:
> > > Should we ban the _p0 suffix from the
> > > tree or should be change the version comparison behavior so that
> > &
On Sunday 06 May 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> +# ChangeLog for dev-java/jid3
> +# Copyright 1999-2007 Gentoo Foundation; Distributed under the GPL v2
> +# $Header: $
>
> Shouldn't this be 2007-2007 or just 2007?
no ... the files are based on skeleton files which date back to 1999
-mike
signature.
This is your one-day friendly reminder ! The monthly Gentoo Council
meeting is tomorrow in #gentoo-council on irc.freenode.net. See the
channel topic for the exact time (but it's probably 2000 UTC).
If you're supposed to show up, please show up. If you're not supposed
to show up, then show up a
On Thursday 10 May 2007, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Thilo Bangert wrote:
> > All packages with maintainer-needed will be moved to
> > no-herd.
>
> maintainer-needed is different from no-herd. no-herd is valid when a dev
> is maintaining a pkg outside of a herd. no-herd is not valid for when
> the pack
On Friday 11 May 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> livecd
> (only a livecd is volative, even embedded devices have non volative
> storage)
i would use that myself ... perhaps even tie in USE=netboot ...
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Saturday 12 May 2007, Duncan wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
> > On Friday 11 May 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> >> livecd
> >> (only a livecd is volative, even embedded devices have non volative
> >> storage)
> >
> > i wou
On Saturday 12 May 2007, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> More important, what's with optional dependencies!? We don't support
>
> LICENSE="GPL-2 ssl? ( openssl-exception)"
yes we do
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Saturday 12 May 2007, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> Does it matter that the DUID-LLT isn't stored when starting from a Live-CD?
> I don't see why there is the need for a use flag for this functionality,
> when it doesn't imply a new dependency.
the concern was to have a way to provide "nice" clients
On Saturday 12 May 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Jan Kundrát wrote:
> > Matti Bickel wrote:
> >> It's main additions are a "timely response clause", which
> >> requires us to get the same keywords for a newly released version as the
> >> previous had within 28 days. Another point is the "no patche
On Saturday 12 May 2007, Matti Bickel wrote:
> recently, there's been some worries about the changes and new
> requirements the ion upstream, tuomov, put forth in a new LICENSE for
> ion-3. It's main additions are a "timely response clause", which
> requires us to get the same keywords for a newly
On Saturday 12 May 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> I've thought long and hard about it and I think a compile time option
> is best here. You can still disable the usage of DUID by null arg to
> the -I option, but many users launch dhcpcd by hand on the live cds.
hmm, you can do it at runtime ? then yo
On Sunday 13 May 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 12 May 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> > > I've thought long and hard about it and I think a compile time
> > > option is best here. You can still disable the usa
On Monday 14 May 2007, Daniel Black wrote:
> Marijn mentioned on Irc that the bestcrypt license commercial trial license
> shouldn't be a supported package in Gentoo.
if you dont want to support it then dont ... it isnt any dev's place to tell
other devs what software they choose to support
> Is
On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> "Caleb Tennis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * - This version has a new soname, so it will require a
> > revdep-rebuild, which is probably why it hasn't been stabilized as of
> > now.
>
> Isn't this why we have slots?
no
-mike
signature.asc
Descr
On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> * - This version has a new soname, so it will require a revdep-rebuild,
> which is probably why it hasn't been stabilized as of now.
so add a call to preserve_old_lib / preserve_old_lib_notify like should have
been in there in the first place ... see
On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> > > * - This version has a new soname, so it will require a
> > > revdep-rebuild, which is probably why it hasn't been
On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Mike Frysinger napsal(a):
> > On Tuesday 15 May 2007, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> >> * - This version has a new soname, so it will require a revdep-rebuild,
> >> which is probably why it hasn't been stabilized as
On Monday 28 May 2007, Didi wrote:
> works fine as soon as I add the -static flag for g++
>
> g++ -g -Wall -static `curl-config --cflags` `curl-config --libs` -l
> xerces-c Ui.cpp GetDataCurl.cpp GetDataAmazon.cpp XmlParser.cpp
> Options.cpp
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/../../../../
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
(#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
G
keeping documentation of functions in a separate file (man pages in this case)
has obvious bit rot problems written all over it, so i'd like to merge the
documentation into the respective eclasses so that the man pages can be
automatically generated
off the cuff, i'd propose a style like:
# FUN
On Saturday 02 June 2007, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> Is the council planning on replacing the two missing members (Flameeyes
> and Kloeri)?
yes, we're planning on replacing kloeri in line with the decisions made last
time (when Flameeyes left)
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally
looks like the meeting summary was never sent out, so here it is
- Documentation for mail servers are on gentoo.org now in infrastructure
project
- Social contract changes are waiting on the trustees to clarify the
Foundation statement
- proctors have been working on requested CoC updates but
This is your one-day friendly reminder ! The monthly Gentoo Council
meeting is tomorrow in #gentoo-council on irc.freenode.net. See the
channel topic for the exact time (but it's probably 2000 UTC).
If you're supposed to show up, please show up. If you're not supposed
to show up, then show up a
On Monday 11 June 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> keeping documentation of functions in a separate file (man pages in this
> case) has obvious bit rot problems written all over it, so i'd like to
> merge the documentation into the respective eclasses so that the man pages
> can
there are many files out there that contain critical information about your
system ... lets look at /etc/shadow
baselayout installs this file, yet it is not listed in CONTENTS for a very
good reason ... if someone were to run `quickpkg baselayout` and post the
file somewhere, they could easily
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > mayhaps we need a new function to be run in src_install() to label
> > files as "sensitive" ... so baselayout would do:
> > esosensitive /etc/{fstab,group,passwd,shad
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-20-06 at 00:47 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > there are many files out there that contain critical information about
> > your system ...
> >
> > however, there are certainly cases where the admin fully k
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > no reason to write off something critical like this when it can be
> > addressed
>
> It can be addressed by banning binary package creation off an
> installed filesystem.
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> >> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> mayhaps we need a new function to be run in src_install() to label
> >>&
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > being able to generate binary packages that actually reflect the live
> > $ROOT is desirable
>
> Is being able to generate redistributable binary packages that reflec
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:54:34 -0400
>
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > bein
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 15:57 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > mayhaps we need a new function to be run in src
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The specific underlying question being, what are the use cases for
> > > binary packages?
> >
> > the use of the binpkg is not an issue, it's the cre
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > The specific underlying question being, what ar
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-20-06 at 17:19 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > the use of the binpkg is not an issue, it's the creation ... people
> > blindly creating tbz2's which could contain their sensitive files and
> > posting
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-20-06 at 18:28 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-20-06 at 17:19 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > the use of the binpkg is not an issue
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 18:50 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > Well, I often use quickpkg when I want to try a new version of a
> > > package (I quickpkg the currently installed one.. and I want to keep
> > > all th
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Josh Saddler wrote:
> Do potential licensing/copyright issues like these factor into your
> proposal in any way?
no, that's an exercise for the user and no one else ... there's no way i'd
have the tools prevent this. about the only thing i'd add is a reminder
message
On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 June 2007, Josh Saddler wrote:
> > Do potential licensing/copyright issues like these factor into your
> > proposal in any way?
>
> no, that's an exercise for the user and no one else ... there's no w
On Thursday 21 June 2007, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> * dev-java/ibm-jdk-bin-1.5.0.5: package has RESTRICT="fetch/(no)mirror"!
> * dev-java/ibm-jdk-bin-1.5.0.5: it may not be legal to redistribute this.
this is incorrect ... while USE=bindist has an exact 1-to-1 correlation with
the legality of bu
maintaining arch things across multiple operating systems is boring me so i'd
like to start moving to profiles that outline arch-specific details
for example:
default-linux/parent:
../base
default-linux/sh/parent:
..
../../arch/sh
arch/sh/parent:
..
arch/parent ->
On Thursday 05 July 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 12:31 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > maintaining arch things across multiple operating systems is boring me so
> > i'd like to start moving to profiles that outline arch-specific details
> >
&g
get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
in the next day or so
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Friday 06 July 2007, Jim Ramsay wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> > glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> > gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
>
> Are there any crazy upgrade
On Friday 06 July 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
> in the next day or so
sorry, forgot about ~ia64 as well
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This
On Friday 06 July 2007, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> > glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> > gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
> > in the next day or so
>
> gcc-4.2.0 won&
On Friday 06 July 2007, Steve Long wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> > this would be for 2007.1+ profiles and we can leave the old things in
> >> > place until we phase out 2007.0 and older completely
> >>
> >> This is actually something I was alread
On Friday 06 July 2007, Duncan wrote:
> Could you reopen bug #179744 (kdesvn amd64 -fPIC issue) and add it to the
> 4.2 tracker? I didn't file it so can't, but it's definitely 4.2 related.
done, cheers
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Friday 06 July 2007, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Harald van Dijk napsal(a):
> > so eutils.eclass's check_license function should probably be used.
>
> Broken until Bug 17367 is implemented.
the same exact thing could be said for everything using `built_with_use`
> It's enough that loads of games kill no
On Friday 06 July 2007, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 12:08:20AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> > glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> > gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
> > in the nex
On Friday 06 July 2007, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> static - !!do not set this during bootstrap!! Causes binaries to be
> statically linked instead of dynamically
i dont really think this is in the same category at all with the other flags
you mentioned here ... plus i'm not sure this is eve
On Friday 06 July 2007, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> > glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> > gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
> > in the next day or so
>
> From the
On Friday 06 July 2007, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> > glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> > gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
> > in the next day or so
>
> Now that the futimens pat
the new util-linux package has merged the setarch binary. for the upgrade
path, i figure we do:
- drop sys-apps/setarch from profiles
- add sys-apps/setarch to util-linux-2.12 based on arch?()
- add !sys-apps/setarch to util-linux-2.13+
any input ?
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a
On Sunday 01 July 2007, Ryan Reich wrote:
> This is a small essay on Gentoo's setup for fcron.
which is troublesome because some of the things here are specific to fcron
(which frankly dont interest me) while others are specific to the cronbase
package which installs `run-crons` (which does inte
often times when i get a bug report about certain packages, there's
information about that package that i usually ask for ... i wonder if this
can be automated
perhaps extend the syntax of profiles/info_pkgs:
[command to pass to system()]
sys-libs/glibc /lib/libc.so.6
then when people run `eme
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Kevin Lacquement wrote:
> Marius Mauch wrote:
> > 5) considering 3), I'd rather see such information be specified by
> > ebuilds somehow, not a global file (think about overlays). Maybe by
> > installing a script in a specific location or so.
>
> How about adding another f
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Kent Fredric wrote:
> Implementation details wise, I would like to see packages have
> possibly 2 functions,
> 1: Info, and 2: Check.
> Reason Being that you wont be able to fetch installation status info
> on a package thats not installed, and if a package is failing to
>
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Peter Gordon wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 04:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > you missed a critical aspect: offline time. the way run-crons is
> > implemented, if you happen to routinely shut your machine off at the time
> > that the cronjo
On Saturday 07 July 2007, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 7/8/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 07 July 2007, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > > Implementation details wise, I would like to see packages have
> > > possibly 2 functions,
> > >
On Sunday 08 July 2007, Ryan Reich wrote:
> On 7/7/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 07 July 2007, Peter Gordon wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 04:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > you missed a critical aspect:
On Sunday 08 July 2007, Kent Fredric wrote:
> Ok, I've re-thought some of my ideas and tried to come up with a more
> concise explanation
> with some practical example syntax. The basic concept of 'check' was
> 'this will work even if the package aint installed yet' and info was
> 'for working but
On Monday 09 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> As for IUSE defaults... There were objections against that feature on
> the grounds that it's unnecessary and increased maintenance. Do they
> really offer any benefit over package.use?
where ? i have yet to see an objection to IUSE defaults and pl
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:26:19PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > As for IUSE defaults... There were objections against that feature on
> > the grounds that it's unnecessary and increased maintenance. Do they
> > really offer any benefit over packa
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> > On Tuesday 10 July 2007, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:26:19PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >>> As for IUSE defaults... There were objections against that feature
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
> On 2007/07/10, Thilo Bangert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - we could finally kick all the no* USE flags. USE flags are use
> > flags - they determine what should be used. not what should not be
> > used...
>
> Because of the way USE fl
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
> On 2007/07/10, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the no* flags were introduced more to address default behavior than
> > the -* case, so yes we can kick many of the no* USE flags
>
> To addres
On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> For various reasons, I've got a couple of packages that I'm not really
> very well suited to maintain going on. I added them over the course of past
> jobs and university courses, but I have no further need of them, and they
> really could use peop
On Thursday 12 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 10:18 +0100, Steve Long wrote:
> > > Or is it `acceptable' for me to put GPLv3 on, say, an ebuild I
> > > wrote from scratch?
> >
> > The point is that we don't feel that you *ca
On Thursday 12 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Which feelings are clearly wrong, for anyone with any degree of
> > > familiarity with ebuilds.
> >
> > perhaps, but in the larger scheme of things, irre
On Thursday 12 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 16:10:48 -0400
>
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 12 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > Wh
On Thursday 12 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > third parties are free to license however they like.
>
> Could the Foundation make a formal statement to that effect, and could
> wolf31o2 retract his claim that all ebui
On Thursday 12 July 2007, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
>
before people start responding with their opinions, take this to the trustees
list. that list is for all Gentoo licensing/copyright/blah-blah-boring-crap.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Friday 13 July 2007, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, documention won't help to resolve the legal questions about this
> > (what exactly is necessary to assign copyright from a person to the
> > foundation), and that's the main problem IMO.
>
> I never re
On Sunday 15 July 2007, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
> My point is just that it doesn't work that well with the USE_ORDER that
> have been chosen. Even keeping the "-* in make.conf" case appart
> (obviously my opinion on how it should behave was not widely shared, i
> can live with that), the
On Sunday 15 July 2007, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2007-07-15 21:22:07 Mike Frysinger napisał(a):
> > On Sunday 15 July 2007, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
> > > the day you switch from IUSE="nocxx" to IUSE="+cxx", will you
> > &g
On Monday 16 July 2007, Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Пнд, 16/07/2007 в 10:50 -0700, Ned Ludd пишет:
> > net-firewall/ebtables
> > net-misc/netkit-telnetd
>
> taken.
>
> base-system, are there any objections if I add you as the herd? related
> applications like iptables and other netkit-* apps belongs to
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Alin Năstac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was asked to discuss here a portage enhancement proposed by me [1].
> >
> > Basically I need a pkg_create() that will be executed only in the
> > context of the upcoming "ebuild ${PF}.ebuild create" command.
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Alin Năstac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Basically I need a pkg_create() that will be executed only in the
> > context of the upcoming "ebuild ${PF}.ebuild create" command.
>
> This isn't something that should be done in an ebuild. It's more
> sui
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Alin Năstac wrote:
> P.S: The name proposed by me isn't exactly right, as Mike already
> remarked on the bug. I suggest to use src_create as function name.
Marius proposed src_makedist which is pretty good ... i wonder though if there
may be a better prefix than src_ or p
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Michael Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 07:16 -0500, Rick Sivernell wrote:
> > I am trying to contact somebody in charge of gentoo. I have tried for
> > years now to get my email address off your list, but all has failed. If
> > someone knows this person or will se
historically, gcc on x86 has always defaulted to i386. some people noticed
recently that glibc-2.6 fails to build in this situation as they were only
setting -mtune via CFLAGS, not -march. i'll be tweaking gcc so that it will
default -march based on your CHOST. so all the i686-* people will n
i dont think he'll accept, but i dont see Flameeyes name yet ...
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Peter Gordon wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 19:47 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > historically, gcc on x86 has always defaulted to i386. some people
> > noticed recently that glibc-2.6 fails to build in this situation as they
> > were only sett
On Wednesday 18 July 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 19:47 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > historically, gcc on x86 has always defaulted to i386. some people
> > noticed recently that glibc-2.6 fails to build in this situation as they
> > were only sett
On Tuesday 17 July 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i dont think he'll accept, but i dont see Flameeyes name yet ...
his ISP decided to poop on him for a while, so he contacted me off list to say
he accepts
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Thursday 19 July 2007, Duncan wrote:
> OTOH, if enabling those protocols pulls in all sorts of additional
> packages to support them, shipping with everything on just because it's
> possible is not the Gentoo way. That's what USE flags are for.
USE flags are not for controlling dependencies, t
On Saturday 21 July 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 11:48 -0700, Josh Saddler wrote:
> >From our perspective, /etc/conf.d/* is quite well documented, so GDP
>
> could easily diff the files to see what has changed.
>
> > Of equal concern to me, however are a few issues:
> >
> > 1) H
On Saturday 21 July 2007, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 21:28 +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-07-21 at 22:22 +0200, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> > > Is there a common bug to report snags to? I've hit one:
> > > /etc/init.d/net.eth0 used to be a symlink to net.lo. After
> > > in
On Saturday 21 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> # Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Jul 2007)
> # Last release from 1999, still using GTK+-1.2.
> # Masked for removal in 30 days.
> x11-misc/fsv
in other words, you have no real reason for punting this package ?
-mike
signature.asc
Descri
On Sunday 22 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 21 July 2007, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > > # Samuli Suominen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (21 Jul 2007)
> > > # Last release from 1999, still using GTK+-1.2
a topic for the gentoo-nfp list since it'd be the trustees making the decision
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
for people who maintain a package which utilizes bindnow-flags(), please feel
free to modify the ebuild to no longer use this or append any such ldflags.
the logic for handling set*id bindings is the business of the ldso (aka
glibc), not for ebuilds.
for example, if your ebuild does:
inherit f
1601 - 1700 of 3334 matches
Mail list logo
