On 13/05/18 13:23, Eli Schwartz wrote:

On 05/12/2018 09:21 AM, Allan McRae wrote:

...

I am about to call the final freeze. Anything final to add that I missed?

Well, I'd kind of like my modeline changes to go in, since technically they're the continuation of a patchset from over a year ago.

https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2017-January/021819.html https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2017-January/021829.html

OK.

I still think https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2018-April/022433.html should be added, but see my response there.

As discussed on IRC, I think this needs more time. We need to figure out the idea way of handling sources with the same name in different architectures (if any is actually needed - it could be user handled...) and this may also overlap the sources in subdirectories idea. I'd prefer this to miss the 5.1 release so we don't implement a solution now that may need to change in the next release. Allan

On 05/22/2018 10:59 AM, Que Quotion wrote:

What's the status on making BUILDENV extendable?

I've been using pacman-buildenv_ext-git very successfully for quite some time now.

https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/buildenv_ext.patch?h=pacman-buil...

pacman-buildenv_ext-git can even be used to build packages with pgo, graphite, and lto in a "clean" chroot. I do this very often, it works (so long as the software being packaged itself can be safely optimized in those ways).

Status: where were you a couple weeks ago? We're now in deep freeze, no exceptions unless pacman is *broke* as-is: https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2018-May/022488.html The buildenv patches can be reviewed for the next point release. Since you're the one who wants it, it's up to you to nudge us to get it in. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

On 05/22/2018 01:08 PM, Que Quotion wrote:

...

where were you a couple of weeks ago?

Somewhere between (still) scouring the Internet for an email client that is actually capable of replying to mailing lists, holding out that Allan was working on his own approach and that the patches I submitted before were still visible somewhere that mattered.

Did it take you 2 years? Because that's the last discussion about this I could find.

...

the next point release

That's fine. I'll post a new version of the patch for consideration after this.

Awesome! Thanks. Note that you can post it right now, it'll just get marked in patchwork as deferred while we focus on more immediate things. Speaking of... we seem to have lost some patchwork history, which might explain in part how this got forgotten.

...

you're the one who wants it

I can't be the only one who wants this.

Can we not get into a useless argument about this? If you cannot confirm other people who want it, they might as well not exist for the purposes of this discussion. Your belief that it's a useful feature is not a priori proof that other people exist who have been craving this. *Notwithstanding which*, it seems useful, and I've got no personal objections to implementing it. AFAICT Allan doesn't either. But, and this is the huge "but", this still doesn't mean that you can disregard the usual logical rule of "people who are motivated to see something happen, will invest the personal effort to *make sure* it happens". It merely needs the handful of regulars here to be uninterested on a personal level, to ensure that they will not, on a personal level, put in that work, ensuring that that work needs to be done by you. You, being the one person who lies in the intersection of "people who post, if occasionally, to pacman-dev", and "people who have visibly demonstrated they want this". -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User