On Thursday 10 April 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> Also, you'll have to provide a URL to said change. i havent seen a
> patch for it in my random driftings on the interweb.
> -mike
I was just researching the issue, so had this handy:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg00417.html
--
/PA
On Saturday 31 May 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Saturday 31 May 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > ive made this shift in profiles.desc:
> > sed -ir '/^(arm|s390|sh)/s:stable:dev:' profiles.desc
> > if/when we get dedicated arch maintainers, they can think about
> > shifting back
>
> for the confu
On Monday 30 June 2008, Michael Hammer wrote:
> * Jeremy Olexa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080630 19:53]:
> > [...] IMO, b-w'ing is something that anyone can do.
>
> s/can/should ? I mean bug wrangling is a very important thing
> especially in the sight of users. I'm really willing to help on
> b-w'ing if
On Sunday 20 July 2008, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 10:19:10AM +0000, Peter Alfredsen (loki_val)
wrote:
> > loki_val08/07/20 10:19:10
> >
> > Modified: openldap-2.4.7.ebuild
> > openldap-2.4.10.ebuild openldap-2.3.41.ebuild
>
Hi,
It won't be long before I ask for poppler-0.8 and -bindings to be
stabilized. This will bump the soname for poppler and force a rebuild
of all packages depending on it. I've opened a tracker bug at
http://bugs.gentoo.org/235897 where you can add a comment or place a
blocker bug if you want
On Thursday 28 August 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
[poppler-0.8 stabilization]
> Is 0.8 needed by something? We could also wait for Portage-2.2 and
> preserved-libs.
It's all-round better than 0.6.3, which is from December 2007.
epdfviewer, evince and a bunch of other stuff uses it to render pdfs
@ECLASS: base.eclass
# @MAINTAINER:
-# ???
+# Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#
# Original author Dan Armak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
# @BLURB: The base eclass defines some default functions and variables.
# @DESCRIPTION:
# The base eclass defines some default functions and variables. Ne
On Sunday 02 November 2008, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
[...]
Please just imagine that this is added to the end of the patch:
-
-EXPORT_FUNCTIONS src_unpack src_compile src_install
/me had started hacking on this in-tree, and the first change was
removing that line.
--
/PA
signature.asc
v2
# $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/eclass/base.eclass,v 1.34 2008/07/17 09:49:14 pva Exp $
# @ECLASS: base.eclass
# @MAINTAINER:
-# ???
+# Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#
# Original author Dan Armak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
# @BLURB: The base eclass defines some defau
On Monday 03 November 2008, Steve Long wrote:
> Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > debug-print-function $FUNCNAME $*
>
> You should be using "$@" not unquoted $*.
Fixed. Also fixed base_src_unpack and base_src_compile calling their
grunt functions with $1, when clearly i
On Wednesday 05 November 2008, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> You should at least use emake instead of make in src_install. And i
> would suggest to use something like this instead of the make install
> line (maybe add some other default docs, if they are common):
>
> if [ -f Makefile ] || [ -f GNUmakefil
On Sunday 02 November 2008, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> The attached patch for bug 238753 makes base.eclass support EAPI 2
> functions.
Applied
--
/PA
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
I attach here a proposed new function for eutils.eclass. Review
requested. Thanks to zlin and igli for initial review and suggestions
on #gentoo-dev-help.
--
/PA
--- /usr/portage/eclass/eutils.eclass 2008-09-28 07:06:15.0 +0200
+++ eutils1.eclass 2008-11-06 22:22:51.0 +0100
@@ -1
On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > + # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la
> > files will be needed. + if type -P scanelf &> /dev/null
>
> I think this is a not so
On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> You could identify ELF a bit more reliable by running file on e.g.
> "${ROOT}/bin/bash", or just by building a list of CHOSTs that you
> know are ELF systems.
D'oh, should have thought of that. See attached patch.
> > > > + debug-
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> I heavily object to having any such function introduced or used or
> equivalent .la removals conducted without a good rationale and
> explanation of why this is the approach taken. I see no such
> explanation anywhere, you are just blatantly re
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 18:34 Sun 09 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > "I've been told" that .la files are really only needed on non-ELF
> > systems and with plugin systems that use dlopen.
>
> And for people who want to b
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Le 12/11/2008 15:40, Peter Alfredsen a écrit :
> > But let me point out that in most leaf-packages, removing la files
> > will cause no pain, but will ensure that they do not have to be
> > rebuilt if a .la-listed dependen
On Wednesday 12 November 2008, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On K, 2008-11-12 at 15:40 +0100, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > It's a utility function. I've done all I can to ensure it'll be
> > used wisely. Whether it is used wisely is between you and ( $ROOT
> > or $666
On Friday 14 November 2008, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > [Snip more pie-in-the-sky]
> >
> > Show me the code, please.
>
> If you weren't interested in hearing differing opinions, then why did
> you ask in the first place? :P
I just thought it sounded like a tall order, saying that fixing
libtool .la fi
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:52 Tue 25 Nov , Peter Alfredsen (loki_val) wrote:
> > loki_val08/11/25 23:52:04
> >
> > Added:gtk-sharp-module.eclass
> > Log:
> > eclass required for gnome-sharp and gnome
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 09:42:07 +0100
>
> Peter Alfredsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > This seems like a really strange strategy for checking whether a
> > > certain item is in a list.
> >
> >
On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 09:42 Wed 26 Nov , Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 November 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > > # Make selecting components configurable.
> > > > epatch ${WORKDIR}/${MY_P}-c
On Thursday 27 November 2008, Duncan wrote:
> In that case, it may be better to do the limited code duplication,
> given the relative permanence of eclasses.
So, what is it we're short of? Developer time or harddrive space? Is our
problem that our packages start to bitrot or that we have huge nu
+# Peter Alfredsen (20 Dec 2008)
+# Masked for removal in 30 days. Version that compiles with gcc-4.3
+# is not ready for stable ( bug 251566 ).
+# Upstream has abandoned it, alternatives such as gedit exist.
+app-editors/katoob
+
--
/PA
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
Below is a copy of the eclass I intend to use for all apps from
go-mono.com (AKA mono-project.com). Pretty standard fare. The affected
ebuilds are:
www-apache/mod_mono
dev-dotnet/xsp
dev-dotnet/libgdiplus
dev-dotnet/gluezilla
dev-lang/mono
dev-lang/mono-basic
dev-util/mono-debugger
dev-util/mono-
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:04:28 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> # @FUNCTION: go-mono_src_unpack
> # @DESCRIPTION: Runs default()
> go-mono_src_unpack() {
> default
> }
>
> What's the point? The ones from base.eclass should be doing the same
> thing as the default ones any way.
>
> The same goes
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:31:30 +0300
Peter Volkov wrote:
> Hi Peter.
>
> > NO_MONO_DEPEND=(
> > "dev-lang/mono"
> > "dev-dotnet/libgdiplus"
> > "dev-dotnet/gluezilla"
> > )
>
> Just curious. What are the reasons to use array here?
I try to use arrays as often as possible, so I don't
# Peter Alfredsen (25 Jan 2008)
# Fails to compile, bug 212097.
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
app-pda/dopi
[Mike: This looks like your field of expertise]
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:47:50 +0100
Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> glibc 2.9 uses a different way to implement getaddrinfo() which
> triggers a race condition in most (if not all) Netfilter
> firewalls that use connection tracking. glibc does no
# Peter Alfredsen (30 Jan 2009)
+# Nothing uses this anymore, depends on gtk-sharp:1
+# Masked for removal in 30 days.
+dev-dotnet/gtkgl-sharp
+
+# Peter Alfredsen (30 Jan 2009)
+# No longer maintained upstream, depends on gtk-sharp:1
+# Masked for removal in 30 days.
+dev-dotnet/mcatalog
+
+# Peter Alfredsen (1 Feb 2009)
+# Masked for removal in 30 days. Old and unmaintained. Upstream is gone.
+# Does not work with current ipod-sharp versions, see 195746. This
+# removes half of its functionality.
+# Is faily, see bug 256473.
+media-sound/monopod
+
On Wed, 11 Feb 2009 19:02:12 +0100
"Santiago M. Mola" wrote:
> media-sound/last-exit
*snatched*
+# Peter Alfredsen (15 Feb 2009)
+# Masking for removal in 30 days.
+# Fails to build with gcc-4.3, bug 250712
+media-video/gephex
+
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:43:09 -0700
Steve Dibb wrote:
> Plus, I don't really grasp the whole "we have to source the whole
> ebuild to know the EAPI version" argument. It's one variable, in one
> line. Can't a simple parser get that and go from there?
The problem is that its technically allowed f
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:21:23 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Let's try something new. I would like to get opinions from as many
> people as possible about GLEP 55 and alternatives listed here in order
> to get some idea what the general developer pool thinks.
[...]
I dislike GLEP 55 aesthetically, b
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 04:01:36 +0200
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> I'm collecting ideas from the wider development and contributing
> community on how to help maintainers and contributors get work done
> quicker, or rephrased - how to get more done in the limited time we
> have.
Something like what Debia
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 02:32:13 -0500
Caleb Cushing wrote:
> I'd like to start with, I'm not trying to stir up trouble but since
> questions were asked i'll answer them.
>
> > If you think neither should exist why do you have an opinion about
> > this at all?
>
> I merged the java-overlay into rege
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 20:26:24 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> * src_test run unless RESTRICTed or explicitly disabled by the user
> (bug 184812)
This one is not uncontroversial and will not go in a 'quick' EAPI I
think.
/loki_val
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:44:55 -0500
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> I'm wondering what exactly is the harm in letting developers idle for
> a while?
Nothing, as long as they don't pretend to be maintaining packages while
they idle. See compnerd and his tonne of system-packages for reference.
It unnecessar
On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:37:12 +0100
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> To make our lives easier I would suggest deprecating EAPI0 and
> migrating existing ebuilds over some time to EAPI1 or higher until
> EAPI0 can be obsoleted at some point in the future.
> I would set the start of deprecation warnings about
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 09:41:58 +0100
Matti Bickel wrote:
> A general question, that just popped into my head when i was reading
> this: if i touch a ebuild which has EAPI=0, should i bump it to
> EAPI=2?
Only if you take the time to read through it and test that your revised
ebuild will have the s
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:26:06 -0100
"Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" wrote:
[...]
> Saleem Abdulrasool (compnerd)
[...]
> dev-dotnet/dbus-glib-sharp
> dev-dotnet/dbus-sharp
[...]
Snatched
Since genstef has been .away for some time, I arranged with him that I'd
send a list of his ebuilds that need maintenance to be put up for grabs.
This list contains all ebuilds that have no herd, at least one open bug
and where genstef is the maintainer.
media-video/linux-uvc
media-video/isight-fi
Hi,
This is an eclass that provides functionality needed to further split
poppler into its constituent libraries and utilities. The current way
of doing this, where we have poppler with utils in app-text/poppler and
the bindings for qt3, qt4 and glib in app-text/poppler-bindings is
suboptimal.
1)
On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 19:34:01 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne středa 25 Březen 2009 19:25:02 Peter Alfredsen napsal(a):
> I will just pick parts with notes. Some of them apply on more
> places :]
>
> > # @ECLASS-VARIABLE: HOMEPAGE
> > # @DESCRIPTION:
>
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:40:14 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> No, an EAPI bump is necessary. Older (post-EAPI) Portage versions do
> something different, so any ebuild relying upon particular behaviour
> is already broken.
For an example of this, see http://bugs.gentoo.org/264308
Paludis --info does not work for me. Plz2fix.
In particular, have a look at
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=262277#c4
Where both emerge --info and paludis --info is posted. Sometimes, more
is less.
While it may be useful to post all the information about the
package-manager for *you*, it's
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:07:37 +0200
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Tiziano Müller schrieb:
> >> With this, i would also like to see any
> >> changes that need an EAPI to get into EAPI-3.
> > No. Won't happen.
> >
>
> Can you also explain your statement?
EAPI-3 is closed for new features. We want it imp
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 12:03:03 +0200
Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Could anyone actually give a good reason for slot operators? What
> packages would have a _clear_ benefit from using them? I'm asking for
> an actual list of packages, not just some package that may exist in a
> parallel universe.
All pa
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:29:53 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> I think the current way is the most easily-supportable way for us.
> Complex interdependencies b/w packages and slots => O(n^k) times bugs,
> where k = no. of slots for a library.
>
> If we don't get all those bugs, it means people are
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 17:06:47 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> So you're looking for ABI deps? @preserved-libs is the answer (C-sharp
> support for that?). Suggested rebuilds upon upgrade? Separate issue,
> separate solution (pkg_pretend maybe?)
@preserved-libs is a horrible hack that is used in pl
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:17:15 -0700
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> 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 Gentoo dev
> list to see.
Up or down vote on USE="static-libs". It seems it wasn't actually voted
on las
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 12:21:55 -0400
Thomas Anderson wrote:
> Why are we trying to get rid of static libraries again? I have not
> seen any compelling reason to remove libraries that may be useful to
> our users. Perhaps I've missed some discussion(in which case, I'd
> love to read it), but this se
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:14:36 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:10:50 +0200
> Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > A reasonable default would be --disable-static. Then libs that have
> > in-tree consumers of their static libs could then make a use-flag,
> > u
On Wed, 6 May 2009 08:49:53 +0200
Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> any project lead/member can post an answer to this mail for a status
> report:
Gentoo .NET progress
Currently doing good. Nothing much to report. Everything is shiny
and well-oiled. SVN ebuilds of trunk and branches were r
On Thu, 14 May 2009 22:03:22 +0200
Ben de Groot wrote:
> I concur that speaking for myself, I don't understand the issue. And
> it looks like many others don't either. So if anyone wants to promote
> this GLEP, their job is clear: make people understand what the issue
> is here, and convince them
On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:56:06 +0200
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> I know gentoo has other problems too, but it's the new and
> innovative stuff that makes working on Gentoo fun.
YES !
/loki_val
On Sun, 17 May 2009 22:54:38 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Peter Alfredsen
> wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:56:06 +0200
> > Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> >
> >> I know gentoo has other problems too, but it's the ne
On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 23:10:47 +0300
Timur Aydin wrote:
> Today I have tried to merge openswan-2.4-14 into my ~x86 system. The
> compilation failed because of a name clash:
Please attach your patch here:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=271987
We use bugzilla for bug reports.
/loki_val
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:27:41 -0400
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think a consolidated systemd/udev package is the best
>> way to go here.
>
> A consolidated package means that:
>
> - every change made by udev developers would have
This outcome was just super. Systemd was bumped to -188 today. Udev is
still at -187. Instead of actually listening to upstream[1], which
would be easy with a virtual, we're now stuck with one part of the duo
being at one version and the other part of the duo another. And when I
login to X with thi
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 20:11:18 +0200
> Peter Alfredsen wrote:
>
>> This outcome was just super. Systemd was bumped to -188 today. Udev is
>> still at -187. Instead of actually listening to upstream[1], which
>> w
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM, justin wrote:
> On 16/11/12 09:48, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> does this mean it puts the binary-only package, nvidia-cg-toolkit, to
>> the default search path when you call the linker (compiler)?
>>
>> please don't do that, it is counterproductive with the purpose
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> IAN DELANEY posted on Thu, 06 Jun 2013 17:55:16 +0800 as excerpted:
>
>> # Ian Delaney (06 Jun 2013)
>> # Masked for removal in ~ 30 days. Upstream inactive dev-python/elixir
>
> Where's the bug reference one would normally ex
On Monday 15 October 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > einfo
> > einfo "Compile dev-libs/boost with USE=threads or
> > USE=threads-only"
> > einfo "if you want threading support for btg"
> > einfo
Shouldn't that be "t
67 matches
Mail list logo
