| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/570972
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/530960
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Also random QA fixes, make sure we are using the right compiler, CFLAGS
gets passed around properly, use eapply and PATCHES since it's already
EAPI=6.
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/628732
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/637190
Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/5641
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/532296
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/587446
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove the track-src-odirect USE flag. This flag causes burn failures
when reading from a data file.
More information at https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=257602
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
RepoMan-Options: --force
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Needed for net-nds/gss-proxy-0.8.0
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/7045
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/7025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Remove useless/redundant maintainer <description/>. It does not benefit
bug wrangling, and only wastes developer's time on reading it. Few tips:
- assignee/CC is implied by ordering, there is no reason to repeat it,
- we know that maintainer is maintainer (la la la la la),
- most of adjectives for maintainer are of no value and/or are obvious.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The <description/> of maintainer is supposed to explain maintainer's
role, not the package.
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/645430
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/646858
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
RepoMan-Options: --include-arches="hppa"
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
RepoMan-Options: --include-arches="ia64"
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
RepoMan-Options: --ignore-arches
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|
|
|
|
| |
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.24, Repoman-2.3.6
|