Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 4/23/20 4:45 AM, lego12...@yandex.ru wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:24:07PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> FWIW, I do know there are situations where static linking is the right >> thing to do. > > If you project require strong security, than it would be simpler to use > static

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Friday, April 24, 2020 9:56 PM, Michele Alzetta wrote: > I mean, basically portage is just a set of functions, so a functional > programming language might just be the best way to go yes, haskell passes step (1); so does php, java, etc. now kindly apply the rest of the steps ((2) and

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 06:30:25PM +0200, inasprecali wrote: > There is no rational reason for the core of Portage to be written in > C. There are more than one rational reasons to do so. -- Олег Неманов (Oleg Nemanov)

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

I mean, basically portage is just a set of functions, so a functional programming language might just be the best way to go Il giorno ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 19:54 Michele Alzetta < michele.alze...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > ... seems like you're describing haskell ... > ... now, portage written

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

... seems like you're describing haskell ... ... now, portage written in haskell would be really something Il giorno ven 24 apr 2020 alle ore 14:36 Caveman Al Toraboran < toraboracave...@protonmail.com> ha scritto: > On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones > wrote: > > > > No-no.

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Friday, April 24, 2020 8:30 PM, inasprecali wrote: > There is no rational reason for the core of Portage to be written in > C. curious.. are you also cool if busybox was written in python?

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 24 Apr 2020, at 18:37, Caveman Al Toraboran wrote: > > On Friday, April 24, 2020 8:30 PM, inasprecali > wrote: > >> There is no rational reason for the core of Portage to be written in >> C. > > curious.. are you also cool if busybox was written > in python? The argument for a

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 12:22:39 +0300 lego12...@yandex.ru wrote: > The core of portage should be in C, imho. But it can be extendable > with hooks written in something simple like a bash. > It mustn't be a solid binary. It can be splitted into separate parts > with strict definitions of interaction

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Friday, April 24, 2020 4:45 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > How did we get from "Is Gentoo dead?" to "Is C++ dead?" c++ is very alive. it just usually exists in the form of a disease and spreads like cancer. rgrds, cm.

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones wrote: > >   No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. > > C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code > written daily world wide.  i think that might be misleading as it seems to imply that being a

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 8:35 AM Caveman Al Toraboran wrote: > > On Wednesday, April 22, 2020 8:32 PM, Michael Jones > wrote: > > > > No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. > > > > C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code > > written daily world

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 03:27:16PM -0500, Steven Lembark wrote: > > > portage must be in C and statically linked. > > Seems to argue in favor of a statically-linked dynamic language: The > runtime compiler can be static with install scripts being a bit more > malleable. The core of portage

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

lego12...@yandex.ru wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:19:26PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > >> If you only sync once a day, then yes, you'll only have to rebuild once >> a day. I sync considerably more than that though, and besides, it takes >> me about a week to emerge -e @world. > Just

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 11:52:52AM +0300, lego12...@yandex.ru wrote: > Nobody talk about "everything is statically linked". > However, this is a good idea ;-), but this is a topic for another > conversation :-). No wonder Yandex considers you SPAM.

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:19:26PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > It's not that everything depends on OpenSSL, but that everything depends > on /something/. If everything is statically linked, then any update of > any package sets off a chain reaction of other packages that trigger > rebuilds of

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:24:07PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > FWIW, I do know there are situations where static linking is the right > thing to do. If you project require strong security, than it would be simpler to use static linking. If you have many instances of the same program or have

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:22:02PM -0500, Michael Jones wrote: > But I don't generally want my entire system statically linked, only a few > things. But who said that *entire* system should be statically linked? The conversation is so far only about such a critical thing as portage. -- Олег

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:33:45PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > If you statically link more than a few things, this is emerge -e @world > twenty times a day. Hm :-D. And why it should be so? I run emerge one time in a week. If there are any changes in a dependancy of some package, why it

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:19:19PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > How do you plan to update all of your programs when there's a security > vulnerability in, say, OpenSSL? Hm. And why we need every package to be statically linked? I told just that static linking is a good and useful feature.

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 4/22/20 3:22 PM, Michael Jones wrote: > > But I don't generally want my entire system statically linked, only a > few things. > FWIW, I do know there are situations where static linking is the right thing to do.

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 2:19 PM Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 4/22/20 3:15 PM, Michael Jones wrote: > > > > Why would I need to emerge world? Portage knows the full list of > > packages that depend on openssl, transitively. > > > > Unless you're generalizing to say that (almost) everything

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 4/22/20 3:15 PM, Michael Jones wrote: > > Why would I need to emerge world? Portage knows the full list of > packages that depend on openssl, transitively. > > Unless you're generalizing to say that (almost) everything depends on > openssl, I suppose. > > Also, didn't the handbook, at one

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 1:33 PM Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 4/22/20 2:24 PM, Michael Jones wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 1:19 PM Michael Orlitzky > > wrote: > > > > How do you plan to update all of your programs when there's a > security > >

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:38:40PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > Rust packages get no security updates. Neither do Go packages. That's > what I'm screaming about in those threads on gentoo-dev that you singled > out in your original post =) Oh... I was under the impression that $EGO_SUMS

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 4/22/20 2:24 PM, Consus wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:19:19PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> How do you plan to update all of your programs when there's a security >> vulnerability in, say, OpenSSL? > > emerge -1 @world of course :D > > By the way, Rust does support dynamic linking

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 4/22/20 2:24 PM, Michael Jones wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 1:19 PM Michael Orlitzky > wrote: > > How do you plan to update all of your programs when there's a security > vulnerability in, say, OpenSSL? > > > Is there some reason why all packages

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 02:19:19PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > How do you plan to update all of your programs when there's a security > vulnerability in, say, OpenSSL? emerge -1 @world of course :D By the way, Rust does support dynamic linking (to a degree), but does not have (yet, I pray)

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 1:19 PM Michael Orlitzky wrote: > How do you plan to update all of your programs when there's a security > vulnerability in, say, OpenSSL? > Is there some reason why all packages that depend on OpenSSL, transitively, could not be recompiled?

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On 4/22/20 2:08 PM, lego12...@yandex.ru wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 07:48:01PM +0200, Alessandro Barbieri wrote: >> Whatever, but QA is by my side and I'm helping removing static libraries >> from gentoo packages. > > Man, this is not a technical argument. Sorry :-). You are wrong from a >

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 07:48:01PM +0200, Alessandro Barbieri wrote: > Whatever, but QA is by my side and I'm helping removing static libraries > from gentoo packages. Man, this is not a technical argument. Sorry :-). You are wrong from a technical point of view. And the fact above says just: -

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

Whatever, but QA is by my side and I'm helping removing static libraries from gentoo packages. https://projects.gentoo.org/qa/policy-guide/installed-files.html?highlight=static#pg0302 Also more context here: https://flameeyes.blog/2011/08/29/useless-flag-static-libs/

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:47 AM wrote: > C is more widespread, than C++. > Yes, this is true. > C++ is unneededly complex and for such core thing like a portage > C would be better. C code is simpler and robust. More people know it. > More people can send patches. Etc. > I disagree to the

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:32:49AM -0500, Michael Jones wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:30 AM wrote: > > No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. > > C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code > written daily world wide. C is more widespread,

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 11:30 AM wrote: > > No-no. C++ is a nightmare. A few people want to use it. > C++ is an extremely widespread language with millions of lines of code written daily world wide. Lots of people want to use it. Just not people who want to write a PMS compliant package

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 12:16:20PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 4/22/20 12:14 PM, lego12...@yandex.ru wrote: > > Yes. And yes again :-). +1 > > portage must be in C and statically linked. > > python is a strange dependency. > > Paludis was a C++ package manager, but is dead now. No

Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [OBORONA-SPAM] Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 06:17:52PM +0200, Alessandro Barbieri wrote: > Nothing should be statically linked, please stop spreading the disease. You are wrong ;-). -- Олег Неманов (Oleg Nemanov)