| 1 |
eiВ Втр, 16/11/2010 в 07:53 +0100, Hans de Graaff пишет: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 06:40 +0000, Peter Volkov (pva) wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > +# Peter Volkov <pva@g.o> (16 Nov 2010) |
| 5 |
> > +# Last rites: dev-python/py-rrdtool #345701 |
| 6 |
> > +# Old python bindins that currently are included into net-analyzer/rrdtool |
| 7 |
> > +# Removal on 16 Dec 2010 |
| 8 |
> > +dev-python/py-rrdtool |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I have a similar todo item on my list for the standalone ruby bindings, |
| 11 |
> but I have not masked them yet because rrdtool 1.0.50 doesn't include |
| 12 |
> them and is still in the tree. I'm not sure when the python bindings got |
| 13 |
> incorporated into rrdtool, but I'm guessing it might be similar. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> Any plans to remove rrdtool-1.0.50 from the tree? Or should I just go |
| 16 |
> ahead and remove the ruby bindings anyway? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
rrdtool-1.0 is used by SFlowtool and last time I've tried it worked so I |
| 19 |
don't see any reason to drop rrdtool-1.0.50 from the tree. As for |
| 20 |
bindings, py-rrdtool have known problems and thus I've decided to drop |
| 21 |
it. Probably it's good idea to do the same for ruby bindings as rrdtool |
| 22 |
ChangeLog suggests that some problems were fixed there too. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
If users need bindings they better use recent rrdtool and bundled |
| 25 |
bindings, rrdtool-1.0.x for sflowtool only. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Peter. |
Archives