Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News item: upgrading to Plasma 5

On 07/04/16 01:45, Jonathan Callen wrote: > On 04/06/2016 07:46 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > > > In the event you're not explicitly using a desktop or KDE desktop > > profile, can you provide a summary of the changes that should be > > made manually when switching the the kde-plasma/* ebuilds

[gentoo-dev] Re: News item: upgrading to Plasma 5

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 04/06/2016 07:46 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > > In the event you're not explicitly using a desktop or KDE desktop > profile, can you provide a summary of the changes that should be > made manually when switching the the kde-plasma/* ebuilds

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 05:36:09PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: > > > >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > >> > >>> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: > >>> On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > >>> What, if any, is the

[gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

Richard Yao posted on Wed, 06 Apr 2016 10:04:05 -0400 as excerpted: > That being said, this is only useful for new installs where people want > to take advantage of the Solaris way of doing management. It should have > no benefit for existing installs. I don't know enough about solaris to

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

>> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: >>> On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: >>> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I >>> happen to have a few

Re: [gentoo-dev] GitHub GPG Signature Verification

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 04/06/2016 10:52 AM, NP-Hardass wrote: > Greetings all, > > As of yesterday, GitHub now supports GPG signature verification > [1]. As a result, when viewed through the GitHub mirror, all > commits now have a widget that displays whether the GPG

[gentoo-dev] [warning] the bug queue has 88 bugs

Our bug queue has 88 bugs! If you have some spare time, please help assign/sort a few bugs. To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5 Thanks!

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: > On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > > What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I > > happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share > > presently, with some

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-libs/libqinfinity

# Michael Palimaka (06 Apr 2016) # Fails to build. Dead upstream. Bug #579020. # Masked for removal in 30 days. net-libs/libqinfinity

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: kde-misc/kte-collaborative

# Michael Palimaka (06 Apr 2016) # Fails to build. Dead upstream. Masked for removal in 30 days. kde-misc/kte-collaborative

Re: [gentoo-dev] GitHub GPG Signature Verification

On 04/06/2016 01:52 PM, NP-Hardass wrote: > Greetings all, > > As of yesterday, GitHub now supports GPG signature verification [1]. > As a result, when viewed through the GitHub mirror, all commits now > have a widget that displays whether the GPG signature has been > verified (via GitHub). To

[gentoo-dev] GitHub GPG Signature Verification

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Greetings all, As of yesterday, GitHub now supports GPG signature verification [1]. As a result, when viewed through the GitHub mirror, all commits now have a widget that displays whether the GPG signature has been verified (via GitHub). To help

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On 04/06/2016 12:33 PM, Richard Yao wrote: > On 04/06/2016 12:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:06:35 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: >> >>> That is unless you put per-system state in /usr/local, do symlinks to it >>> in / and mount /usr/local as part of system boot, which

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 12:15:58AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote > If others are not willing to be advocates for ***THOSE USERS THAT WOULD > ONLY MAKE THEMSELVES KNOWN AFTER AN A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE HAS BEEN MADE > AND PEOPLE ARE DETERMINED TO GO AHEAD WITH THIS***, I suggest having > and testing a

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:57:20 PM CEST, Alexis Ballier wrote: usr-merge does not deal with that at all. usr-merge deals with the intracate dependencies of /usr onto /lib, /bin, etc. by now that I read this again: 'etc.' was the shortcut for 'et caetera' and has nothing to do with /etc

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:33:41 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: On 04/06/2016 12:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:06:35 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: ... Leveraging the /usr merge to enable easier updating of multiple systems means that you are updating a Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On 04/06/2016 12:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:06:35 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: > >> That is unless you put per-system state in /usr/local, do symlinks to it >> in / and mount /usr/local as part of system boot, which is the other way >> of doing this. I have seen a

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On 04/06/2016 12:06 PM, Richard Yao wrote: > On 04/06/2016 11:11 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 4:58:05 PM CEST, M. J. Everitt wrote: >>> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I >>> happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:06:35 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: That is unless you put per-system state in /usr/local, do symlinks to it in / and mount /usr/local as part of system boot, which is the other way of doing this. I have seen a variant of this done in asuswrt-merlin on routers.

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On 06/04/16 17:06, Richard Yao wrote: > > That does not address the problems of supporting this configuration in a > rolling release. > > Formats in /etc can fall out of sync with software in /usr. If boot > options change, the stuff in /etc/init.d is not updated. If you add > software, the update

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On 04/06/2016 11:11 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 4:58:05 PM CEST, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I >> happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share >> presently, > > > This is

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I > happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share > presently, with some bodgery-workarounds I did pre the udev notification > about initramfs's which I have

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 4:58:05 PM CEST, M. J. Everitt wrote: What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share presently, This is precisely one case where I see benefits: no need to correlate /

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share presently, with some bodgery-workarounds I did pre the udev notification about initramfs's which I have never got around to implementing (although I'm

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 4:04:05 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: Most systems would switch fine. The ones configured to depend on /usr not being mounted in early boot would not. That is the reason automatically migrating people is not the best idea. I believe any script/binary should not run

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

On 04/06/2016 01:34 AM, Duncan wrote: > Richard Yao posted on Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:15:58 -0400 as excerpted: > > >>> On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >>> >>> All, >>> >>> I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lost >>> track of the

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:55 AM, James Le Cuirot wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Apr 2016 09:42:04 +0200 > Alexis Ballier wrote: > >>> This was invented in Solaris and copied by RHEL. The upgrade >>> path for the /usr merge on those systems is a complete >>>

[gentoo-dev] GPG key

For those having a minor panic, I've just imported my home email GPG key to my work PC .. so that's the reason I've sent out an erroneous email. Rest assured the key is -right- and thanks to K_F I have two properly functional Thunderbird/Enigmail installs working with kwalletcli from pinkbyte's

Re: [gentoo-dev] News item: upgrading to Plasma 5

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 03/04/16 18:34, Michael Palimaka wrote: > Hi, > > KDE team intends to stabilise Plasma 5 shortly, so please review the > accompanying news items. > > Regards, > > Michael > > Title: KDE Plasma 5 Upgrade > Author: Michael Palimaka

[gentoo-dev] Re: News item: upgrading to Plasma 5

On 04/04/16 07:57, Richard Yao wrote: > On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 03:34:07AM +1000, Michael Palimaka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> KDE team intends to stabilise Plasma 5 shortly, so please review the >> accompanying news items. >> >> Regards, >> >> Michael >> >> Title: KDE Plasma 5 Upgrade >> Author: Michael

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wed, 06 Apr 2016 09:42:04 +0200 Alexis Ballier wrote: > > This was invented in Solaris and copied by RHEL. The upgrade > > path for the /usr merge on those systems is a complete > > reinstall. Upgrading from RHEL6 to RHEL7 this Solaris 10 to > > Solaris 11 is not

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:15:58 AM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote: All, I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lost track of the message where it was brought up, I would open a new thread to discuss