Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Allan Gottlieb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers.
Hrm. I thought this was gentoo-user , which I thought was one of many places
(gentoo-user)'s can ask for help on various subjects.
'gentoo-user | General Gentoo user support and discussion mailing list' [1]
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/lists.xml
--
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print enNOSPicAMreil [EMAIL PROTECTED][(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Kent Fredric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh wait, my confusion. You were possibly referring explicitly to whom should
and should not be on the linux dev ml.
( If otherwise, please do unset my fail bit i just assigned on myself )
--
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print enNOSPicAMreil [EMAIL PROTECTED][(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Wednesday 17 September 2008 00:50:42 Allan Gottlieb wrote: Rather, It is less objectionable for people who have accomplished a very great deal and have greatly improved the computing environment for the members of the corresponding mailing list. Like would not apply as I don't know either linus or the members of this mailing list. Ah, so it's hero-worship, then? Linus can be obnoxious, but it's OK because he's soo cool? 2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers. Not even slightly relevant. Why? Because you say people will avoid software because they don't like its developers. Nothing to do with any mailing list.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
At Wed, 17 Sep 2008 07:33:11 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 17 September 2008 00:50:42 Allan Gottlieb wrote: Rather, It is less objectionable for people who have accomplished a very great deal and have greatly improved the computing environment for the members of the corresponding mailing list. Like would not apply as I don't know either linus or the members of this mailing list. Ah, so it's hero-worship, then? Linus can be obnoxious, but it's OK because he's soo cool? You are changing words. I said less objectionable you summarized it as OK. You can use the term hero-worship if you choose, but it only approximates what I said. But I do agree that it is true that those who accomplish a lot are given greater latitude. 2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers. Not even slightly relevant. Why? Because you say people will avoid software because they don't like its developers. I never said any such thing. You are confusing my posts with someone else's. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
At Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:24:04 +1200 Kent Fredric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Kent Fredric [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh wait, my confusion. You were possibly referring explicitly to whom should and should not be on the linux dev ml. ( If otherwise, please do unset my fail bit i just assigned on myself ) Yes, you misread my post. I said that list when I had just discussed the kernel list. allan gottlieb
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Mr Leverton: Please be advised that I have initiated a formal process requesting to have you banned from this list by [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is after many requests from others for you to calm down on the list, and two private mails from myself asking the same, both of which you have not answered. On Wednesday 17 September 2008 14:06:51 Allan Gottlieb wrote: At Wed, 17 Sep 2008 07:33:11 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 17 September 2008 00:50:42 Allan Gottlieb wrote: Rather, It is less objectionable for people who have accomplished a very great deal and have greatly improved the computing environment for the members of the corresponding mailing list. Like would not apply as I don't know either linus or the members of this mailing list. Ah, so it's hero-worship, then? Linus can be obnoxious, but it's OK because he's soo cool? You are changing words. I said less objectionable you summarized it as OK. You can use the term hero-worship if you choose, but it only approximates what I said. But I do agree that it is true that those who accomplish a lot are given greater latitude. 2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers. Not even slightly relevant. Why? Because you say people will avoid software because they don't like its developers. I never said any such thing. You are confusing my posts with someone else's. allan -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
2008/9/17 Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is after many requests from others for you to calm down on the list What exactly am I doing that isn't calm? two private mails from myself asking the same, both of which you have not answered. I only received one, that didn't contain any content worth answering.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:35 AM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
2008/9/17 Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This is after many requests from others for you to calm down on the list
*mumble mumble mumble*
two private mails from myself asking the same, both of which you have not
answered.
*mumble mumble*, *mumble mumble mumble FLAMEBAIT*.
So much easier through poo-tinted glasses.
--
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print enNOSPicAMreil [EMAIL PROTECTED][(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 22:37:21 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake.
It's not paludis-only, it will work with any package manager whose
developers care enough to support the useful features of the kdebuild-1
EAPI.
and that was an official api? Yes? No?
Official according to whom? It is a stable and well documented eapi that any
package manager that regards those features to be useful can implement.
Was it needed? No - proven by kdesvn-portage
And noone ever claimed otherwise.
[...]
The KDE overlay isn't produced by the paludis-group.
no, it was just made by vivid paludis fans. Hey, lets make an overlay a lot
of user want - and make it paludis only. That way we can push paludis!
Wow. What do you base this nonsense on?
No, to provide ebuilds that make use of useful features that benefit both
users and developers.
which one? Which features 'benefit both users and developers' and are sooo
important that the kde overlay had to be paludis only?
Name them please.
- '-scm' support (--dl-reinstall-scm for users)
- use dependencies (no surprising interruptions mid-merge)
- suggestions (you see them upfront rather than in elog messages afterwards)
- sets
The latter of these is not subject to eapi but incredibly useful when dealing
with huge amounts of packages. It obsoletes meta packages and makes
reinstalls or uninstalls of all packages in the sets trivial. For Paludis it
also means that you can unmask/keyword two hundred packages just by addding
the sets to your packages.{keywords,unmask} equivalents. Both Paludis and
Portage 2.2 now has sets support although the details of their
implementations vary greatly.
Oh, does paludis support and equivalent to 'keep-going' or
'--ignore-failures' or are people who wants this extremly usefull features
still attacked and insulted?
Paludis had --continue-on-failure long before --keep-going was implemented in
Portage (which is months after the creation of the kdebuild overlay). This is
also one of the advantages that users of live KDE ebuilds got by using
Paludis (or get if you consider the additional flexibility when compared
to --keep-going to be useful).
On Monday 15 September 2008 00:38:18 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
lets see - an overlay is setup to develop and test ebuilds for KDE4 that
should some day go into the tree.
Deciding to use a feature that the official pm does not provide - and only
one of the three makes the 'testing' part and 'for the tree' pretty
superfluos.
And again I wonder what you base this nonsense on. Perhaps you never ever
bothered to look at this overlay, what it provides or what the intentions
behind it was?
As one of the original decision makers behind it I can tell you, that we never
intended to put any of these ebuilds in the tree. For this reason it also
never contained any release of KDE. Releases were maintained separately in
the tree using eapi 1. It only contains live ebuilds. Which is where '-scm'
and sets support provide the biggest advantages.
And we didn't do it to harass users. We did it because we wanted to get some
real world experience with some of the features that Paludis had provided for
years yet there were no indications Portage would support any time soon. Live
KDE packages was deemed the place where adding this requirement made the most
sense. Managing two hundred packages without those features is pain anyway.
We decided that the monthly KDE releases that we were packaging and adding to
the main tree using eapi 1 were frequent enough for those who didn't want
Paludis for whatever reason. If anybody disagreed with that they could
maintain their own overlay (which they did/do). We also announced it over
three weeks before we actually made it happen so anybody who cared about the
live KDE ebuilds can't really complaim about having been caught by surprise.
--
Bo Andresen
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
2008/9/16 Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I didn't say they were.You're never going to convince Volker, but you may well have succeeded in discouraging others from try Paludis. On what grounds? The Paludis developers don't like being lied about, therefore I won't use Paludis? I don't think the sort of person who would use that logic (presumably someone who intends to lie about the developers of his package manager) is the kind of person we want as a user anyway.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 21:42:09 David Leverton wrote: 2008/9/16 Neil Bothwick [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I didn't say they were.You're never going to convince Volker, but you may well have succeeded in discouraging others from try Paludis. On what grounds? The Paludis developers don't like being lied about, therefore I won't use Paludis? I don't think the sort of person who would use that logic (presumably someone who intends to lie about the developers of his package manager) is the kind of person we want as a user anyway. That is not for you to decide. The user - ANY user - is free to decide what software they want to run and under what conditions, free from irrelevant judgements of suitability from self-appointed arbiters of whatever. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:42:09 +0100, David Leverton wrote: I didn't say they were.You're never going to convince Volker, but you may well have succeeded in discouraging others from try Paludis. On what grounds? The Paludis developers don't like being lied about, therefore I won't use Paludis? Because you attitude was abrasive and antagonistic. Remember, you may have been responding to one person, but you were sending your mail to everyone. Read Bo's response for an example of a way to make the point far more clearly in a single, reasoned email with no ad hominem attacks. I don't think the sort of person who would use that logic (presumably someone who intends to lie about the developers of his package manager) is the kind of person we want as a user anyway. I rest my case. -- Neil Bothwick ABORT: Drivel filter is compromised! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 21:04:11 Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
On Sunday 14 September 2008 22:37:21 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake.
It's not paludis-only, it will work with any package manager whose
developers care enough to support the useful features of the kdebuild-1
EAPI.
and that was an official api? Yes? No?
Official according to whom? It is a stable and well documented eapi that
any package manager that regards those features to be useful can implement.
Was it needed? No - proven by kdesvn-portage
And noone ever claimed otherwise.
[...]
The KDE overlay isn't produced by the paludis-group.
no, it was just made by vivid paludis fans. Hey, lets make an overlay a
lot of user want - and make it paludis only. That way we can push
paludis!
Wow. What do you base this nonsense on?
No, to provide ebuilds that make use of useful features that benefit
both users and developers.
which one? Which features 'benefit both users and developers' and are
sooo important that the kde overlay had to be paludis only?
Name them please.
- '-scm' support (--dl-reinstall-scm for users)
- use dependencies (no surprising interruptions mid-merge)
- suggestions (you see them upfront rather than in elog messages
afterwards) - sets
The latter of these is not subject to eapi but incredibly useful when
dealing with huge amounts of packages. It obsoletes meta packages and makes
reinstalls or uninstalls of all packages in the sets trivial. For Paludis
it also means that you can unmask/keyword two hundred packages just by
addding the sets to your packages.{keywords,unmask} equivalents. Both
Paludis and Portage 2.2 now has sets support although the details of their
implementations vary greatly.
Oh, does paludis support and equivalent to 'keep-going' or
'--ignore-failures' or are people who wants this extremly usefull
features still attacked and insulted?
Paludis had --continue-on-failure long before --keep-going was implemented
in Portage (which is months after the creation of the kdebuild overlay).
This is also one of the advantages that users of live KDE ebuilds got by
using Paludis (or get if you consider the additional flexibility when
compared to --keep-going to be useful).
On Monday 15 September 2008 00:38:18 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
lets see - an overlay is setup to develop and test ebuilds for KDE4 that
should some day go into the tree.
Deciding to use a feature that the official pm does not provide - and
only one of the three makes the 'testing' part and 'for the tree' pretty
superfluos.
And again I wonder what you base this nonsense on. Perhaps you never ever
bothered to look at this overlay, what it provides or what the intentions
behind it was?
As one of the original decision makers behind it I can tell you, that we
never intended to put any of these ebuilds in the tree. For this reason it
also never contained any release of KDE. Releases were maintained
separately in the tree using eapi 1. It only contains live ebuilds. Which
is where '-scm' and sets support provide the biggest advantages.
And we didn't do it to harass users. We did it because we wanted to get
some real world experience with some of the features that Paludis had
provided for years yet there were no indications Portage would support any
time soon. Live KDE packages was deemed the place where adding this
requirement made the most sense. Managing two hundred packages without
those features is pain anyway.
We decided that the monthly KDE releases that we were packaging and adding
to the main tree using eapi 1 were frequent enough for those who didn't
want Paludis for whatever reason. If anybody disagreed with that they could
maintain their own overlay (which they did/do). We also announced it over
three weeks before we actually made it happen so anybody who cared about
the live KDE ebuilds can't really complaim about having been caught by
surprise.
Actually on that I can rely. I've been using the kde-svn back when it was
portage allowed, and I must say it has been an improvement switching to
paludis. As a user I find --continue-on-failure much better and flexible than
--skip-first and on a live scm tree as this overlay has it is much needed.(
I don't know about --keep-going since it has been implemented only after I've
switched to paludis). I like paludis and it's my choise to use it. To each his
own.
Also don't flatter your selves I wouldn't(would) use a package just because
some dev said something about some other dev, or discard(like) it because some
conversation on IRC. I know what is right for me. So keep using
emerge/gnome/bsd whatever fits you and let's ALL continue with our lives!
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 20:51:43 Alan McKinnon wrote: That is not for you to decide. The user - ANY user - is free to decide what software they want to run and under what conditions, free from irrelevant judgements of suitability from self-appointed arbiters of whatever. Well, yes, I'm just saying that there are certain kinds of people who won't cause any tears on our behalf if they decide not to use Paludis.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 20:54:43 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:42:09 +0100, David Leverton wrote: I didn't say they were.You're never going to convince Volker, but you may well have succeeded in discouraging others from try Paludis. On what grounds? Because you attitude was abrasive and antagonistic. I trust these people won't be using Linux either, then?
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:15:38 +0100, David Leverton wrote: Because your attitude was abrasive and antagonistic. I trust these people won't be using Linux either, then? Manners and respect are OS-agnostic. How you say something can be more influential than what you say. -- Neil Bothwick Quark! Quark! Beware the quantum duck! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 22:13:01 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:15:38 +0100, David Leverton wrote: Because your attitude was abrasive and antagonistic. I trust these people won't be using Linux either, then? Manners and respect are OS-agnostic. Completely not the point.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
At Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:33:27 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 16 September 2008 22:13:01 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 21:15:38 +0100, David Leverton wrote: Because your attitude was abrasive and antagonistic. I trust these people won't be using Linux either, then? Manners and respect are OS-agnostic. Completely not the point. Yes, Linus and others are pretty tough in the kernel mailing list. However 1. You are not linus. 2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers. 3. You are not linus. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Tuesday 16 September 2008 22:39:12 Allan Gottlieb wrote: 1. You are not linus. It's OK for people I like to do this, but not people I don't like? 2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers. Not even slightly relevant. 3. You are not linus. See above.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Neil Bothwick ha scritto: On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 06:34:52 +0100, David Leverton wrote: That was the trigger, not the point. This thread long since ceased to have any point. All you are achieving is to discourage people from trying Paludis if this is the kind of hassle associated with it. My reponses to Volker are certainly not associated with him trying Paludis. I didn't say they were.You're never going to convince Volker, but you may well have succeeded in discouraging others from try Paludis. He did. See my answer below. m.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
At Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:47:57 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 16 September 2008 22:39:12 Allan Gottlieb wrote: 1. You are not linus. It's OK for people I like to do this, but not people I don't like? Rather, It is less objectionable for people who have accomplished a very great deal and have greatly improved the computing environment for the members of the corresponding mailing list. Like would not apply as I don't know either linus or the members of this mailing list. 2. That list is not intended for users, but for developers. Not even slightly relevant. Why? I would think plaudis and/or kde developers would be more interested in the decision of why plaudis was chosen than would users. However, I must admit that neither users nor developers are likely to be interested in comments made in the tone of some of the previous ones on this mailing list. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Am Montag 15 September 2008 00:40:04 schrieb ext Volker Armin Hemmann: so first they attacked someone for asking for it - and then implemented it? nice. Sometimes people change their minds. I guess you never do? Bye... Dirk -- Dirk Heinrichs | Tel: +49 (0)162 234 3408 Configuration Manager | Fax: +49 (0)211 47068 111 Capgemini Deutschland | Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wanheimerstraße 68 | Web: http://www.capgemini.com D-40468 Düsseldorf | ICQ#: 110037733 GPG Public Key C2E467BB | Keyserver: wwwkeys.pgp.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
In case you've missed it... the latest of the 3.5 version KDE is now in portage. It's still keyworded and masked, but still usable. Compiling it now. Cheers... If only 4.1.1 was there... :') Cheers again... -- I was once told that adding ice to Makers Mark was alcohol abuse... Thank God! I thought I had a drinking problem... From the Desk of: Jerome D. McBride
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay...
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay... But unfortunately it requires plaudis ...
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:41 PM, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mariusz Przygodzki ha scritto: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay... But unfortunately it requires plaudis ... At what point stabilization of KDE 4 is? None. It was about availability, not stabilization.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008, Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay... But unfortunately it requires plaudis ... no it does not. kdesvn-portage has ebuilds for: 4.1.1 4.1.65 svn and works with paludis, pkgcore and portage.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Not this one layman -a kdesvn-portage On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Mariusz Przygodzki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay... But unfortunately it requires plaudis ...
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:16:08 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote:
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If only 4.1.1 was there... :')
You know, there's an overlay...
But unfortunately it requires plaudis ...
There's *two* kde overlays, developed in parallel. One requires paludis, the
other doesn't:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] /var/distfiles/svn-src/e17/e/trunk/E-MODULES-EXTRA $ eix
kde-meta
[I] kde-base/kde-meta
Available versions:
(3.5) 3.5.9
(kde-4) [M](~)4.0.4 [M](~)4.0.5
(4.1) (~)4.1.1[1]
(4.2) **4.1.65[1]
(kde-svn) **[1]
{accessibility admin edu games graphics l10n multimedia network nls
pim sdk toys utils}
Installed versions: 3.5.9(3.5)(15:12:36 09/04/08)(-accessibility -nls)
4.1.1(4.1)[1](01:57:59 09/05/08)(admin edu games
graphics l10n multimedia network pim sdk toys utils -accessibility)
Homepage:http://www.kde.org/
Description: KDE - merge this to pull in all non-developer, split
kde-base/* packages
[1] kde4-overlay /var/portage/local/layman/kdesvn-portage
I don't have paludis. I do have kde-4.1.1
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. September 2008 19:16:08 schrieb Mariusz Przygodzki: But unfortunately it requires plaudis ... Why is it unfortunate? because not everybody wants to install that bloated thing - watch it devour config files and be insulted by the troll-brigade. Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake. And as kdesvn-portage shows - it was unneeded. 'We need the features of paludis' was shown as bs. Just another little trick by the paludis-group to convert people. Luckily that failed. You don't need it.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Sonntag, 14. September 2008 19:16:08 schrieb Mariusz Przygodzki: But unfortunately it requires plaudis ... Why is it unfortunate? because not everybody wants to install that bloated thing - watch it devour config files and be insulted by the troll-brigade. Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake. And as kdesvn-portage shows - it was unneeded. 'We need the features of paludis' was shown as bs. Just another little trick by the paludis-group to convert people. Luckily that failed. You don't need it. Fair enough. Thank you very much for pointing it. And I really didn't know about unofficial kdesvn-portage until now.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Mariusz Przygodzki ha scritto: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:41 PM, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mariusz Przygodzki ha scritto: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay... But unfortunately it requires plaudis ... At what point stabilization of KDE 4 is? None. It was about availability, not stabilization. Don't understand. But probably I wasn't making myself clear at all :) What I mean is, for people that do not want to mess with overlays, at what point is kde 4 on the path towards being x86 stable? Any news? m.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:28:28 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: because not everybody wants to install that bloated thing Not bloated. watch it devour config files Lies. and be insulted by the troll-brigade. The only people who get insulted are those who repeatedly and deliberately spread vicious lies, FUD and personal attacks. Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake. It's not paludis-only, it will work with any package manager whose developers care enough to support the useful features of the kdebuild-1 EAPI. And as kdesvn-portage shows - it was unneeded. Unneeded is a funny word. You don't need ebuilds at all, but that doesn't mean they're not useful. 'We need the features of paludis' was shown as bs. No-one said any such thing. They did say that they were sick of waiting years and years for Portage to provide features that would have made their and their users lives a lot easier. Just another little trick by the paludis-group The KDE overlay isn't produced by the paludis-group. to convert people. No, to provide ebuilds that make use of useful features that benefit both users and developers. Luckily that failed. Wrong.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 9:14 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:28:28 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: 'We need the features of paludis' was shown as bs. No-one said any such thing. They did say that they were sick of waiting years and years for Portage to provide features that would have made their and their users lives a lot easier. Maybe they were waiting so many years because they have never asked users about what users really need and think about it. It's not that we hate you (unless we do). It's just that we have nothing to offer you, and you have nothing to offer us.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 20:27:52 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: Maybe they were waiting so many years because they have never asked users about what users really need and think about it. What? It's not that we hate you (unless we do). It's just that we have nothing to offer you, and you have nothing to offer us. Since that has absolutely nothing do to with the topic of discussion, or indeed anything Gentoo-related, your quoting of it at me can only be considered a personal attack.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 9:35 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 20:27:52 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: Maybe they were waiting so many years because they have never asked users about what users really need and think about it. What? It's not that we hate you (unless we do). It's just that we have nothing to offer you, and you have nothing to offer us. Since that has absolutely nothing do to with the topic of discussion, or indeed anything Gentoo-related, your quoting of it at me can only be considered a personal attack. No, it is NOT.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 20:38:49 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: No, it is NOT. Then what is it? If you're not sniping at me (or possibly the genkdesvn team) for being involved with Exherbo, why did you post that here?
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Am Sonntag, 14. September 2008 20:28:28 schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: Just another little trick by the paludis-group to convert people. I started using paludis long before that overlay even existed. Didn't need any tricks. Bye... Dirk
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008, David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:28:28 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: because not everybody wants to install that bloated thing Not bloated. I am sorry: extremly bloated. watch it devour config files Lies. oh really? what happens when you forget the 'portage' useflag? Hm? and be insulted by the troll-brigade. The only people who get insulted are those who repeatedly and deliberately spread vicious lies, FUD and personal attacks. oh really? There are enough examples of troll behaviour. Starting with Ciaranm himself. SPB and rbrown are good examples too. Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake. It's not paludis-only, it will work with any package manager whose developers care enough to support the useful features of the kdebuild-1 EAPI. and that was an official api? Yes? No? Was it needed? No - proven by kdesvn-portage And as kdesvn-portage shows - it was unneeded. Unneeded is a funny word. You don't need ebuilds at all, but that doesn't mean they're not useful. unneeded is the correct choice of words. That 'special feature that only paludis - and unoffical packet manager developed by a dev team which has a very high 'forcefully retired' content - has' was not needed - as shown by kdesvn-portage. Just another little trick by the paludis-group The KDE overlay isn't produced by the paludis-group. no, it was just made by vivid paludis fans. Hey, lets make an overlay a lot of user want - and make it paludis only. That way we can push paludis! No, to provide ebuilds that make use of useful features that benefit both users and developers. which one? Which features 'benefit both users and developers' and are sooo important that the kde overlay had to be paludis only? Name them please. Oh, does paludis support and equivalent to 'keep-going' or '--ignore-failures' or are people who wants this extremly usefull features still attacked and insulted?
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 9:41 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 20:38:49 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: No, it is NOT. Then what is it? If you're not sniping at me (or possibly the genkdesvn team) for being involved with Exherbo, why did you post that here? That's simple :) The mentioned quotation is an accurate conclusion of discussion about why Gentoo users shoud use paludis to install and test KDE4 desktop efficiently ?.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Am Sonntag, 14. September 2008 22:37:21 schrieb Volker Armin Hemmann: Oh, does paludis support and equivalent to 'keep-going' or '--ignore-failures' Yes. Bye... Dirk
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 21:37:21 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008, David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:28:28 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: because not everybody wants to install that bloated thing Not bloated. I am sorry: extremly bloated. I see you're still as good at logic as ever. watch it devour config files Lies. oh really? what happens when you forget the 'portage' useflag? Hm? It installs without support for reading Portage configuration files, in the same way that almost everything else in the tree doesn't support Portage configuration files. You surely wouldn't say that any of those devour config files (at least not for that reason), so why do you say it about Paludis? and be insulted by the troll-brigade. The only people who get insulted are those who repeatedly and deliberately spread vicious lies, FUD and personal attacks. oh really? There are enough examples of troll behaviour. Starting with Ciaranm himself. SPB and rbrown are good examples too. Again, lies and personal attacks. Making the 'official' overlay paludis-only was a BIG mistake. It's not paludis-only, it will work with any package manager whose developers care enough to support the useful features of the kdebuild-1 EAPI. and that was an official api? Yes? No? Irrelevant. Was it needed? No - proven by kdesvn-portage I didn't say it was needed. I said it was useful enough that the genkdesvn team decided that, in their opinion, the benefits outweighed the drawbacks. Other people obviously had different priorities, and so they produced something that suited their needs better. And as kdesvn-portage shows - it was unneeded. Unneeded is a funny word. You don't need ebuilds at all, but that doesn't mean they're not useful. unneeded is the correct choice of words. It is, in the sense that it's not false, but the inferences that you draw from it are spectacularly wrong. That 'special feature that only paludis - and unoffical packet manager developed by a dev team which has a very high 'forcefully retired' content Personal attacks etc. Just because Gentoo was forced to choose between retiring some developers and losing a sponsor doesn't mean that anything those developers ever worked on is evil. was not needed - as shown by kdesvn-portage. You consistently demonstrate a complete failure to comprehend anything in my post. Just another little trick by the paludis-group The KDE overlay isn't produced by the paludis-group. no, it was just made by vivid paludis fans. Hey, lets make an overlay a lot of user want - and make it paludis only. That way we can push paludis! No, That way we can use useful features that have been supported in Paludis for months if not years, instead of having to work around Portage's limitations! which one? Which features 'benefit both users and developers' and are sooo important that the kde overlay had to be paludis only? Name them please. USE deps are the main one. Yes, Portage supports them now, but it didn't at the time, and no-one expected that it would within a reasonable time period. Suggested deps are another nice one. You can read the details of the rest in PMS. Oh, does paludis support and equivalent to 'keep-going' or '--ignore-failures' Read the documentation. or are people who wants this extremly usefull features still attacked and insulted? No-one has been attacked and insulted for wanting extremely useful features.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 21:39:39 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: That's simple :) The mentioned quotation is an accurate conclusion That phrase does not make sense. of discussion about why Gentoo users shoud use paludis to install and test KDE4 desktop efficiently ?. That quotation is not in any way relevant to anything involving Gentoo.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 10:55 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 21:39:39 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: That's simple :) The mentioned quotation is an accurate conclusion That phrase does not make sense. of discussion about why Gentoo users shoud use paludis to install and test KDE4 desktop efficiently ?. That quotation is not in any way relevant to anything involving Gentoo. You has just confirmed again your attitude towards Gentoo users who want to use KDE4. Bye
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 21:11:18 b.n. wrote: Mariusz Przygodzki ha scritto: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:41 PM, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mariusz Przygodzki ha scritto: On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Erik Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 4.1.1 was there... :') You know, there's an overlay... But unfortunately it requires plaudis ... At what point stabilization of KDE 4 is? None. It was about availability, not stabilization. Don't understand. But probably I wasn't making myself clear at all :) What I mean is, for people that do not want to mess with overlays, at what point is kde 4 on the path towards being x86 stable? Any news? You'll have a long wait for that. The KDE devs are talking about 4.2 being useable by regular users. 4.1.1 is ~amd64 and ~x86 in the overlay and nothing has hit the official tree yet. I have no idea when KDE4 will go stable, and I doubt anyone else does either - it's a very volatile thing - but I think I'm quite safe in guessing that it won't happen before 4.2 and not before early next year. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 21:35:08 David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 20:27:52 Mariusz Przygodzki wrote: Maybe they were waiting so many years because they have never asked users about what users really need and think about it. What? It's not that we hate you (unless we do). It's just that we have nothing to offer you, and you have nothing to offer us. Since that has absolutely nothing do to with the topic of discussion, or indeed anything Gentoo-related, your quoting of it at me can only be considered a personal attack. It's also not even a quote from the paludis devs. It's something Ciaran put on a web page about a *highly*experimental* new distro - basically a fork of gentoo ideas that he and his pals could fool around with -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008, David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 21:37:21 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008, David Leverton wrote: On Sunday 14 September 2008 19:28:28 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: because not everybody wants to install that bloated thing Not bloated. I am sorry: extremly bloated. I see you're still as good at logic as ever. watch it devour config files Lies. oh really? what happens when you forget the 'portage' useflag? Hm? It installs without support for reading Portage configuration files, in the same way that almost everything else in the tree doesn't support Portage configuration files. You surely wouldn't say that any of those devour config files (at least not for that reason), so why do you say it about Paludis? and be insulted by the troll-brigade. The only people who get insulted are those who repeatedly and deliberately spread vicious lies, FUD and personal attacks. oh really? There are enough examples of troll behaviour. Starting with Ciaranm himself. SPB and rbrown are good examples too. Again, lies and personal attacks. yeah, sure. But no. Not lies. Or why were this guys forcefully retired? For their behaviour. Also: http://r0bertz.blogspot.com/2007/01/be-careful-when-you-are-on-paludis.html and that was an official api? Yes? No? Irrelevant. no, not irrelevant but the beef of the story. Personal attacks etc. Just because Gentoo was forced to choose between retiring some developers and losing a sponsor doesn't mean that anything those developers ever worked on is evil. no, it just makes you think if you should really use a piece of software whose makers will insult and ridicule you.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
On Sunday 14 September 2008 22:38:42 Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: yeah, sure. But no. Not lies. Or why were this guys forcefully retired? For their behaviour. No, to prevent Gentoo from losing a major sponsor. Also: http://r0bertz.blogspot.com/2007/01/be-careful-when-you-are-on-paludis.html Idiot does something idiotic and is called idiot. Film at 11. and that was an official api? Yes? No? Irrelevant. no, not irrelevant but the beef of the story. So your bureaucratic little rules about what's official and what isn't are more important than what's actually useful? Personal attacks etc. Just because Gentoo was forced to choose between retiring some developers and losing a sponsor doesn't mean that anything those developers ever worked on is evil. no, it just makes you think if you should really use a piece of software whose makers will insult and ridicule you. If anyone likes to insult and ridicule Paludis users, it's not the Paludis developers.
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
-> Working On Your Resume? it-job-openings -- Thread -- -- Date --
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
->
[dubai-property-investment] Re: spring villas for rent
Investors Club Dubai - Alert Re: {property-finder} spring villas for ren
investors-club-dubai
-- Thread --
-- Date --
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Volker Armin Hemmann
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Dirk Heinrichs
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Volker Armin Hemmann
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Dirk Heinrichs
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
David Leverton
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Volker Armin Hemmann
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
David Leverton
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Volker Armin Hemmann
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
David Leverton
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Volker Armin Hemmann
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
David Leverton
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Dirk Heinrichs
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Constantine D. Kardaris
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
David Leverton
Re: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...
Alan McKinnon
A plea for calm (was: [gentoo-user] KDE 3.5.10 in portage...)
Allan Gottlieb
[gentoo-user] Re: A plea for calm
b.n.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: A plea for calm
David Leverton
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: A plea for calm
Kent Fredric
[gentoo-user] Re: A plea for calm
Nikos Chantziaras
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: A plea for calm
David Leverton
Reply via email to
