On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 22:51:08 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> That arbitrary collection of packages is called a system. I don't think
> the goal for Gentoo should be to abandon standards like POSIX in favor
> of 'design system yourself but don't come crying to us if you forget
> some vital component w
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 08:45:22AM +0200, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> > Almost all affected packages can be bumped straight to 4 anyway and
> > so use the improved syntax.
toolchain_src_compile: EAPI=0: count: 38
I'm not sure this can change any time soon. :/
--
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidge
On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:52:11 -0700
Brian Harring wrote:
> Folks-
>
> Keeping it short and quick, a basic glep has been written for what I'm
> proposing for DEPENDENCIES enhancement.
>
> The live version of the doc is available at
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/unified-dependencies/extensib
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:17:03 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> # Samuli Suominen (25 Sep 2012)
> # Multiple build failures: #435394, #423991 and #425806
> # Other bugs: #270830, #368409
> # Unmasking would require addressing the build failure bugs
> # Removal in 30 days
> net-misc/mediatomb
I use
I just added gcc-4.7.2 to the tree, and I'd like to unmask it in a couple
weeks. I don't see anything I'd consider a blocker on the tracker*, but
95 open bugs is still a lot. If you have a bug blocking the tracker please
take a look at it soon. Many of these are trivial and could make good
bugsd
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 03:48:20 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 September 2012 01:24:32 Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:17:03 +0300 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > > # Samuli Suominen (25 Sep 2012)
> > > # Multiple build failures: #435394, #423991 and
On Mon, 01 Oct 2012 14:00:58 -0700
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> (Among other things, because it feels like most of the complains about
> the way tinderbox's logs are handled, "it's easy!" but nobody but me is
> ever going to pick up the task, ...)
Well, duh. You designed, developed, and are the
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 12:53:15 +0200
Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> The EAPI=0 requirement comes from having to provide an update path for
> systems with a package manager without EAPI support. By now we are
> talking about really ancient systems and it's questionable if there is
> any merit in supporti
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:28:20 +0200
Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 21:10:23 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>
> > I'd argue against deprecating EAPI 0 any time soon though. Killing
> > EAPI 1 would be a better idea.
>
> I'm not for forced EAPI bu
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:00:12 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Would be easier to prune old versions if we "force" them to be less
> > using at least preventing new ebuilds to use them. For example, what is
> > the advantage for a new ebuild to s
On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:36:27 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> > Well, it's not just about ebuilds you maintain. Think about something
> > like the gcc-porting trackers where you have to touch a lot of ebuilds
> > across the tree. You really do have to have a working knowledge of the
> > differences
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:01:57 +0200
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> At least in spanish, it's mandatory to end phrases with a dot ".", would
> you agree with trying to enforce this trivial change with a repoman
> warning?
>
> Thanks for your opinions
I'm assuming that since we're now having doze
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 23:28:47 +0200
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Only every second person is using the ChangeLog in eclass/ as pointed
> out and discussed in this ML for so many times it's ridicilous.
So step up and set a good example. Since when do we defer to the LCD (Laziest
Common Developer)?
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:45:38 -0700
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Besides, honestly it's not that bad. I think that half the headache that
> we're having is due to the slotting more than from boost itself. And the
> other half is due to people actually not going to fix their crap because
> "oh I can
On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:34:02 -0400
James Cloos wrote:
> > "DEP" == Diego Elio Pettenò writes:
>
> DEP> Among other things, with each GCC/GLIBC update all but a handful of
> DEP> slots are kept working; in this case I think most if not all <1.50
> DEP> are broken.
>
> One datapoint:
>
> Si
On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:39:14 -0400
Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 11:35 -0700, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > The problem with ICU is worse than you expect. For once, with version
> > 50, it changes ABI (but not soname as far as I can tell) depending on
> > which compiler you
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 07:21:38 +0100
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Graham Murray wrote:
> > > Christ on a $#@%! crutch. You can NOT auto-enable C++11 in your library
> > > based
> > > on a configure test and then stuff flags that are not supported by
> > > previous
> > > compiler versions into pkg-config
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 07:30:06 +0100
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > You can NOT
>
> I am not saying that it is a good idea, but of course you can. It has
> pretty sucky effects on how your library can be used, disabling
> various smart stuff that modern system
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 07:30:06 +0100
Peter Stuge wrote:
> I guess it will be difficult for representatives from a given distribution to
> "fix" very much upstream, if possible I think that the distribution should
> instead be fixed to deal with the limits imposed by upstream practises.
Also, the am
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 01:00:14 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> This has nothing to do with dependencies not getting rebuilt when the library
> does. It's about switching to an earlier compiler version and having
> every single package depending on that library fail to build due to something
On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 12:08:28 +0100
Justin Lecher wrote:
> while tracking down the following error when running "egencache"
>
> GENTOO.GIT//eclass/wxwidgets.eclass: line 84: get_libdir: command not found
> GENTOO.GIT//eclass/wxwidgets.eclass: line 84: get_libdir: command not found
> GENTOO.GIT//e
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 10:21:40 +0100
"Justin Lecher (jlec)" wrote:
> On 02/02/16 23:36, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 12:08:28 +0100
> > Justin Lecher wrote:
> >
> >> while tracking down the following error when running "egencache"
&
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 17:07:48 -0800
Daniel Campbell wrote:
> I see nothing wrong with discussing changes to parts of the tree that
> will affect other developers. Bugzilla is nice and all, but imo it's
> more of an AND thing instead of an OR thing. If the bug is already
> present, I see no real rea
On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 10:58:10 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> Well, if debugging is your only concern, on the system you're going to
> debug from:
> touch herds.xml
Don't do that.
rhill@tundra /usr/portage/dev-util/creduce $ repoman
RepoMan scours the neighborhood...
[INFO] checking package dev-uti
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 15:35:12 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 14:37:41 +0100
> "Justin Lecher (jlec)" wrote:
> > On 15/02/16 13:59, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:16:53 +0100
> > > "Justin Lecher (jlec)" wrote:
> > >> _isdp_big-warning() {
> > >> debug-print-f
On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:08:48 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:06:29 -0700
> Denis Dupeyron wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not
> > > get ignored by them.
> >
On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2016 21:19:31 + (UTC)
> "Joerg Bornkessel" wrote:
>
> > commit: 66afcab271f65b97330e610040ad3acc1b812a03
> > Author: Joerg Bornkessel gentoo org>
> > AuthorDate: Sat May 7 21:18:48 2016 +
> > Commit: J
On Sun, 15 May 2016 08:40:39 +0900
Aaron Bauman wrote:
> On Saturday, May 14, 2016 9:54:11 AM JST Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Aaron Bauman wrote:
> > > On Friday, May 13, 2016 4:52:09 PM JST Ian Delaney wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200
> > >>
> >
On Sun, 15 May 2016 21:35:41 +0200
rindeal wrote:
> apart from the tests, the patch now looks like this:
Please posts the tests too.
--
pgpudg4Ys0VCN.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
This is way past due so I'd like to get 4.6 into stable. There are hardly any
blockers on bug #418383 which makes me go "?!", so if anyone knows of any
issues please let us know.
--
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgetslearn a language baby, it's that kind of place
@ gentoo.org
On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 11:38:42 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> a) depend on all optional test dependencies conditionally to USE=test,
>therefore always requesting the widest (and consistent) testing,
We also need to be more strict about making sure testsuites pass and fixing
them (or disabling them
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 10:50:32 +0100
"viv...@gmail.com" wrote:
> > We probably should not stabilize on ARM until the following is fixed:
> >
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=401561
> >
> > Other architectures are probably okay.
> >
> What about jumping straight to 4.7.2 do you (arm-team)
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 08:20:53 +0100
Michael Weber wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> this commit changes the set of USE flags on the just stabled gcc-4.6,
> running a huge number into an rebuild of an freshly updated package.
> (emerge --newuse recaclulates from "go disabled" to "go missing")
Eh? I thought
On Sun, 20 Jan 2013 21:56:35 + (UTC)
"Christian Faulhammer (fauli)" wrote:
> fauli 13/01/20 21:56:35
>
> Modified: ChangeLog
> Removed: claws-mail-rssyl-0.34.ebuild
> Log:
> clean up
I'm guessing you meant to remove the old 0.33 ebuild, not the newly s
On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 00:02:05 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2013 23:58:22 +
> "Aaron W. Swenson" wrote:
> > ++ If the base profile is to become our server profile, it should not
> > have graphics related USE flags enabled.
>
> ...but that's not how USE flags work. It doesn't
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:27:20 + (UTC)
"Tim Harder (radhermit)" wrote:
> radhermit13/01/27 22:27:20
>
> Modified: metadata.xml ChangeLog
> Log:
> Remove redundant maintainer from metadata.
>
> (Portage version: 2.2.0_alpha161/cvs/Linux x86_64, signed Manifest commit
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:16:56 -0500
Mike Gilbert wrote:
> > If you have some kind of problem with this, I suggest you change the default
> > output of metagen.
> >
>
> Seems to work just fine here. What options are you using?
>
> floppym@naomi ~ % metagen -H app-doc
>
>
> http://www.gentoo.org
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:59:13 -0800
Tim Harder wrote:
> On 2013-01-27 Sun 15:06, Ryan Hill wrote:
> >If you have some kind of problem with this, I suggest you change the default
> >output of metagen.
>
> I just find it annoying to have duplicate info for herds under the m
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> Currently, epunt_cxx always succeeds. This results in some
> of the ebuilds keeping its use even though the C++ checks were removed
> upstream.
>
> Therefore, I'm suggesting to add a simple check to the function -- if
> none of the patchin
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 00:53:06 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 17:57:20 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:36:53 +0100
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Currently, epunt_cxx always succeeds. This results in some
> > > of the ebu
.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/213514
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:24:36 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On keywording/stabilizing, Bugzilla has a flags feature that might be used to
> track what has been tested where.
>
> Flags have three states: +, -, and ?. + and - are obvious, and ? is a
> request. So imag
On Fri, 1 Feb 2013 06:15:32 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> >>
> >> If we added a "Keyword/Stable Request" component to the "Gentoo Linux"
> >> product we could also have it dependent on that, so
On Sat, 02 Feb 2013 12:06:39 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> From a little discussion in this bug
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454600#c11
> it seems that it's not entirely sure what bash version can be assumed.
We have eclasses that require Bash 4 (eg. multiprocessing.eclass uses BASHPID).
On Sat, 2 Feb 2013 23:33:26 +
"Aaron W. Swenson" wrote:
> After years of "if use test ; then ..." just working when
> FEATURES="test" is declared, it isn't working with EAPI5.
I would say that's a bug fix. If you're checking if a USE flag is set then it
had better be in IUSE.
--
gcc-port
On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 01:41:00 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2013 06:15:32 -0500
> Rich Freeman wrote:
> > Are there any issues with changing the product/component on existing
> > bugs? I could see things turn into keyword requests which didn't
> > start ou
On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:48:44 +0100
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> app-admin/eselect-wxwidgets
> dev-python/wxpython
> x11-libs/wxGTK
> dev-util/bakefile
These are the core packages. Any help with these is welcome but we would ask
people to join the team.
> app-dicts/opendict
> app-editors/editra
> app-e
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:40:00 +
Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Live a little. Send a funny email to a list once.
>
> I think you are on the wrong list then.
Has anyone seen my stick? I left it right here...
--
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgetslearn a language baby, it's that kind o
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 18:40:10 +0100
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Peter Stuge schrieb:
> > linux-firmware is okey but not great. The high resolution is there, which
> > was my main concern, but
> it's not so easy to know how to create a savedconfig without installing
> the package.
>
> Ju
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 12:42:11 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> I would justify it through keeping things split and bit-exact clean,
> instead of tightly integrated.
>
> Separate ebuilds mean that:
>
> - each firmware has proper license,
>
> - each firmware can be installed separately and it is _clea
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:36:08 +1300
Kent Fredric wrote:
> It may be advantageous to have a gentoo wrapper script that calls GPG
> with recommended settings to make some tasks easier,
>
> > gentoo-gpg-create --recommended
> > EDITOR=vim gentoo-gpg-rotation --recommended --old=DEADBEEF
>
> and g
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:31:41 +0100
Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> I haven't seen many problems, except one point: that m68k seems to
> have much the same level of activity as mips, and it would be nice if
> we could drop it down in the little CC list on Bugzilla (to the
> unstable arches part).
s390 a
I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open bugs
blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good time
to take a look at them.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/390247
--
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgetslearn a language baby, it's that kind of pl
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 21:58:08 +0100
Piotr Szymaniak wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 11:03:01PM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open
> > bugs blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good tim
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:03:01 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open bugs
> blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good time
> to take a look at them.
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/390247
Forg
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:33:44 -0500
Richard Yao wrote:
> With that said, what do people think?
I think I see a lot of our upstream bug reports being closed as
invalid/unsupported. I think that if upstreams wanted to use jemalloc they
would just do so. If they don't then obviously what they have
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:03:01 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> I'm going to be unmasking 4.7.2 later this week. There are still 47 open bugs
> blocking the 4.7 tracker, so if any are yours now would be a good time
> to take a look at them.
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/390247
On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 15:42:56 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> What do we have useflags for in gentoo?
Not for conditional patching, that's for sure.
> add a "unsupported-kernels" useflag, mask it, add a clear statement in
> the masking reason and be done
If the description of the flag you're adding cou
On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 23:11:44 -0800
Alec Warner wrote:
> I do not find their stance wholly unreasonable. They offered to point
> users at an overlay, if someone was willing to maintain the patches
> there (in lieu of user_patches.) The end result is that if users apply
> the patches, they will get
On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 23:05:28 +0100
hasufell wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/03/2013 06:24 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 15:42:56 +0100 hasufell
> > wrote:
> >
> >> What do we have useflags for in gentoo
On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 20:28:58 +0200
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 03/03/13 19:24, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 15:42:56 +0100
> > hasufell wrote:
> >
> >> What do we have useflags for in gentoo?
> >
> > Not for conditional patching, that'
# Ryan Hill (06 Apr 2013)
# Restrictive licence, basically demo versions of paid software. 14 versions
# have been released in the past 4 years and not one person has requested a
# bump. Use dev-util/codeblocks for all your wxWidgets IDE needs.
# Bug #464768. Removal May 5/13.
dev-util
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:04:57 -0700
"Gregory M. Turner" wrote:
> What do people think of something like this? Obviously the equivalent
> patch to prefix would need to include a test for
> PREFIX_DISABLE_GEN_USR_LDSCRIPT:
>
> Author: Gregory M. Turner
> Date: Fri Apr 12 11:13:21 2013 -0700
>
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 23:41:05 +0200
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> - Make use of readme.gentoo.eclass to make the user aware of the Gentoo
> Linux Kernel Upgrade Guide only the first time he emerges the
> package. Fixes bug #457598.
Call me crazy, but upgrade guides seem like something you might want t
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 08:55:39 +0200
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 23:09:05 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> >
> > > - Make use of readme.gentoo.eclass to make the user aware of the
> > > Gentoo Linux Kernel Upgrade Guide only the first time he emerges
On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:23:00 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013, 10:24:18 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> >
> > Personally I think that the entire idea of only displaying messages on the
> > first install is completely asinine. What exactly
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:03:55 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 April 2013 14:48:13 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 14:33:29 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > but i'm super lazy, so even this manual step is annoying. as such,
> > > i've added USE=multislot support to au
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:56:49 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
> > I suppose you talked with Michal about this and couldn't reach an
> > agreement, like him joining the fonts herd, or at least the mail alias
> > to monitor ft/fc bugs.
> >
> > If you want I can join the fonts herd also, I already have a f
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:12:05 +0200
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > The correct one should be xslt and that's it..
>
> Can you please motivate your opinion? Saying "that's it" is quite hostile.
Terse maybe. Blunt. Hostile? No.
BTW, use xslt.
:)
--
gcc-porting
toolchain,
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 00:24:13 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
>On 23 April 2013 11:58, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On the other hand, you applied infinality, so you're not on my favorite
> > people
> > list either. :P
> We'll need to agree to disagree then. Anyway, no
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013 20:08:43 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As far as I'm aware, we don't really have much of a patch maintenance
> policy in Gentoo. There a few loose rules like «don't put awfully big
> files into FILESDIR» or the common sense «use unified diff», but no
> complete and cl
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 18:36:07 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 11:14:37 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > Therefore, I ask you: how should we name the new (and simpler) patch
> > applying function which will be provided in EAPI 6?
>
> My propositions:
>
> - apply_patches ...
> - a
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:12:13 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 05:30:03 + (UTC)
> Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> > There's value in someone being just contrarian enough to purposefully
> > look for the strangest or most illogical read of a spec and
> > (initially) im
Since people like to start whinging threads every time we have to change flags
on gcc this is a friendly notice of some upcoming changes.
I'm adding an "lto" flag to work around some issues we have with stabilization
of 4.6 on alpha (though the flag will be added to all versions).
I'm also going
On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:33:00 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 05/01/2013 11:25 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Since people like to start whinging threads every time we have to change
> > flags on gcc this is a friendly notice of some upcoming changes.
> >
> [snip lots of
On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:00:29 +0100
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 01/05/2013 06:29, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> > I don't mean to start a flamewar here but the test suite situation is so
> > bad with circular deps (I'm looking at you ruby herd) and random
> > failures that I only enable tes
On Wed, 1 May 2013 10:14:02 +0200
Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:25:40 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>
> > I'm also going to rename the "test" flag to "regression-test" or
> > something similar to get it out of FEATURES="test&q
On Wed, 1 May 2013 08:57:35 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Then the person implementing the code for Paludis is either a monkey
> > or a robot*. Anyone capable of reasoning could puzzle out the
> > implications o
Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
Makefile was being patched to remove -g from CXXFLAGS but -Werror on the same
line was left in. Just in case people weren't aware, building with -Werror
On Fri, 3 May 2013 15:46:41 +0200
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>
> > Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
> > but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
> > packages I maintain. That wi
On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:41:33 +0200
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 03 May 2013 16:15:35 +0200
> hasufell wrote:
> > We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> > warnings with a note that it should be reported upstream.
> But not all of them.
I'm not sure what these warnings accomplish
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:25:40 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> [...]
This is pushed out now. I also ended up dropping LTO support for 4.5. If
you're using LTO as shipped in 4.5 you are braver than anyone deserves to be.
--
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgets
@ gentoo.org
signature.asc
Des
sse4a. I'm guessing
they're just handed through the -march setting.
sys-apps/cpuid is awesome.
MMX2/MMXEXT still confuses me.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
r stable candidates because I know
> some day I'll have an automated request :P
Yes my laziness won out against any objections too. :)
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
wn your robo-stabilisation requests and add it themselves.
> You should just do it yourself or turn your script off.
Did you read the message? The point is you're supposed to add that yourself.
It's not a STABLEREQ until you add arches.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: d
blems for Intel CPUs. And, there's not actually even an
> -m3dnowext flag (anymore?) anyway, so it's kind of a mess.
Ah, that explains why I always thought they were Enh 3DNow options. Looks like
I have them spread out between MMX and Enh 3DNow in analyze-x86. Oops.
--
Ryan
ategorizing open bugs by
how important they are, as you may want to fix actual bugs before worrying
about adding features. Maybe you don't use bugzilla like that but some
people do and lumping these bugs in with the "normal" ones prevents them from
doing so.
--
Ryan Hill
On Wed, 22 May 2013 10:58:26 +0200
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2013 18:57:20 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > Also, your script does not set the STABLEREQ keyword. People are
> > > having to hunt down your robo-stabilisation requests and add it
> > >
just stick it in eutils?
Is NINJAOPTS a variable recognized by ninja or something that would be Gentoo
specific? It'd be nice if you could parse out what you need from MAKEOPTS
instead, but I have no strong feelings.
If there's only two users in the tree right now I don't think an
On Sat, 25 May 2013 22:00:36 -0400
Alex Xu wrote:
> On 25/05/13 09:53 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Is NINJAOPTS a variable recognized by ninja or something that would be
> > Gentoo specific?
>
> MAKEOPTS is Gentoo-specific anyways. MAKEFLAGS is parsed by at least GNU
> make.
>
> 2) if noone replies in 2 months, resolve as obsolete
Of course that would knock them off the list. :)
Maybe we could have two lists for each year - one with and one without m-w bugs.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
alized that no one actually uses fontpath
anymore, that it caused the startup time to drastically increase with the
number of installed fonts, and that adding your own fontpath entries is both
trivial and documented everywhere.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 05 Jul 2013 21:27:46 -0700
Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 22:18 -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> > On 07/05/2013 09:41 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > On Fri, 05 Jul 2013 15:47:08 -0400
> > > "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina&
n/swordandsworcery
> 10. games-action/solar2
>
> any objections? Will commit in 1 week if no one replies.
The only opinions that matters on this is the game team's. You will not commit
this in 1 week if no one replies, only with express approval by them.
--
Ryan Hill
days" rule. You really should have that team's
explicit permission for something like this.
Then it goes to bikeshedlandia.
Which is what happened, so nothing to see here.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
ns. Keep up the good work pacho!
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
x27;t personal opinion?
Course you can do a rev bump for whatever reason you want, but some people will
frown on it unless you have a good reason. eg. if you revbump a stable ebuild
for a build fix i will spend some time sighing at my screen.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:17:26 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-07-24, o godz. 13:23:15
> Ryan Hill napisał(a):
>
> > On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 08:48:14 -0700
> > ""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> >
> > > On 7/24/13 8:31 AM, Alex Alexander
n get the prefix guys on board for 3.
Like I said on the bug I don't think we want to do a new eclass (or if we did I
would make a toolchain-next for masked versions and backport stuff).
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E 7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
>(usually generic) messages mean.
>
> Nobody seemed to be against setting LC_MESSAGES in make.conf.
> I reported a bug now.
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/478382
I've been pretty vocal against this in the past so I just wanted to say I
have no problem setting a default in ma
ng for a crash, it might
> magically disappear (memory areas get cleared out at -O0 but they might be
> re-used without clearing at any other -O level).
If you're feeling adventurous you could try -Og -g with gcc 4.8.
--
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
gcc-porting/t
201 - 300 of 906 matches
Mail list logo
