Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage 2.0.51 comments/questions
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 09:01:53
Message-Id: 200409271101.42703.pauldv@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Portage 2.0.51 comments/questions by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On Monday 27 September 2004 05:52, Duncan wrote:
2 >
3 > Evidently .51 is rather stricter in some things than .50 and a number
4 > of things are QA Notices now that were silent, before. Are things to
5 > the point where it's worthwhile bugging the various ebuilds that emit
6 > these notices, illegal eclass inheritance and the like, or are there
7 > still enough of them it'd just be unnecessary noise?
8
9 If you could come up with patches for those ebuilds (or eclasses) then
10 please post them to bugzilla. (We get the notices too) Without patches it
11 is probably more of an annoyance than actually useful (most maintainers
12 know about them).
13
14 Paul
15
16 --
17 Paul de Vrieze
18 Gentoo Developer
19 Mail: pauldv@g.o
20 Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Portage 2.0.51 comments/questions Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>