FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-28-2012, 04:46 AM
Samuli Suominen
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-crypt/gpa: gpa-0.9.3.ebuild ChangeLog gpa-0.9.1_pre20100416-r1.ebuild

On 27/08/12 16:46, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:

On 27/08/2012 00:18, Samuli Suominen wrote:

why leave the ebuild read $myconf from global scope? $EXTRA_ECONF works
for this


Because extremely simply I forgot to delete the line.



yep, as I guessed, thanks for clearing it (and just ignore rest of the
thread which is pointless ;-)
 
Old 08-28-2012, 01:56 PM
Alec Warner
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-crypt/gpa: gpa-0.9.3.ebuild ChangeLog gpa-0.9.1_pre20100416-r1.ebuild

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:25 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
>> That's all I'm saying. It's being made a whole lot less pleasant that it
>> might be... for what reason? Just to satisfy someone's ego that they're
>> right and can /force/ compliance? Yuck!
>
> Honestly, while I might agree with that sentiment on some of these
> threads, my only complaint with Ciaran's original response was that he
> could have been a bit more direct with his concern. Rather than
> stating that EXTRA_* does not exist as far as ebuilds go, he could
> have just stated that PMS does not allow these variables to be used by
> an ebuild.
>
> However, the reply to that email makes it clear that even though it
> was unstated Ciaran's meaning was understood.
>
> Sure, he didn't get into the why, but I'm not sure I'd expect that.
> I'd probably state it, but I'm probably the second-most-verbose person
> on this list.
>
> If somebody filed a bug against my package and pointed out that
> something was illegal per PMS, probably the first thing I'd do is read
> it to fully understand the situation, and then if I had a concern I'd
> probably ask via irc/private email/etc. That is as much to avoid
> making a fool out of myself in public, but also because when somebody
> who is obviously knowledgeable points out something they consider a
> flaw, it isn't a bad idea to give their concern full consideration.
>
> Sure, if PMS is wrong it ought to be fixed, but the whole point of
> having specifications is that you don't toss them the moment you don't
> like what they say. Then again, I work on regulated software in my
> real job, and even if the spec is wrong changing it still involves a
> process - you don't just ignore it (any behavior in violation of the
> spec is an automatic bug - even if the bug is to fix the spec - and
> unless pretty trivial is justification to prevent release (often this
> is done anyway since it is usually less work to just fix the problem
> than justify to the world not doing it)).

I'm not sure if you have noticed, but many developers in Gentoo
dislike process

>
> In any case, it is best to not take these sorts of things personally
> all around. Most of us are here because our perverse tastes consider
> this stuff fun! Might as well keep it that way...
>
> Rich
>
 
Old 08-28-2012, 02:41 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-crypt/gpa: gpa-0.9.3.ebuild ChangeLog gpa-0.9.1_pre20100416-r1.ebuild

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if you have noticed, but many developers in Gentoo
> dislike process
>

And I'd count myself chief among them. But then again, compared to
what it takes at work to do anything productive, the "process" at
Gentoo just seems like common sense.

Rich
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:35 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org