Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:19:56
Message-Id: 201110122019.02773.vapier@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-im/qutecom: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild by Samuli Suominen
1 On Wednesday 12 October 2011 19:58:31 Samuli Suominen wrote:
2 > On 10/13/2011 02:27 AM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
3 > > Mike Frysinger schrieb:
4 > >>> The removed qutecom ebuild was not broken at any time.
5 > >>
6 > >> by splitting my reply, you changed the meaning. having qutecom in the
7 > >> tree with a depend on versions that i'm now removing breaks the
8 > >> depgraph.
9 > >
10 > > The depgraph is broken after the old versions are removed, not before.
11 >
12 > I'm not sure if you should have gentoo-x86 access anymore... This is scary.
13
14 this isn't helping the conversation
15 -mike

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies