There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
There was an ABI break which means 6.6.2->6.6.1 can't be done but we want
people using latest anyway as there's a lot of churn still.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
As proposed at https://marc.info/?l=gentoo-dev&m=170781377903495&w=2.
"""
There's a few reasons:
* We should accurately map pre-developer-status contributions.
For example, it'd be nice if sam@cmpct.info was mapped correctly
into sam@gentoo.org when doing git blame.
We know sam@cmpct.info and sam@gentoo.org are the same person, it
feels coherent to tell git that via the mechanism intended for it.
* It's useful for when people retire as well. Not that I plan on going
anywhere any time soon (sorry!), but this is both a useful way for
people to better "retain credit" *and* for e.g. 'git blame' to work
better if they then come back as a contributor but not a developer, which
happens on occasion, or if they occasionally contribute with a
different email address (we have this for some devs who contribute
under a "work context" too).
* It allows people to have git respecting changing their name for
various reasons (e.g. we've had contributors start using their real name
and vice-versa over the years).
"""
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
From 10.43 release notes:
> * The JIT code no longer supports ARMv5 architecture.
MAsk USE=jit for <armv6 accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
pkgcheck now has a workaround in stable and it's not a build-time failure
so we can unmask this safely w/o worrying about upgrade ordering or anything.
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/924718
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
Sam James
Andrey Grozin
Craig Andrews
Yixun Lan
Patrick McLean
Maciej Barć