On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 01:19 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
alls the few
packages you can't find in Gentoo, and putting them in /usr/local or
/opt. Heck, I was doing the...
Hi Walter,
Exactly what I've started to do. Problem is, I'm only beginning to learn
how to let Portage know that my manual
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:37:47 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.
That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before being
marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
Without it, your stable branch would not be.
--
Neil
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:40:49 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
However, when I first used gentoo I was always the first in my LUG to
have the latest kde, evolution, mplayer etc, and that was running x86
not ~x86. My perception is that gentoo is no longer first off the block
with stable releases.
I
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 19:49:53 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
openoffice
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# genlop openoffice-bin
* app-office/openoffice-bin
Wed Jul 20 15:29:36 2005 app-office/openoffice-bin-1.9.118
Fri Aug 5 15:07:02 2005
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 21:39:39 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
No, I want it one way: to receive the latest stable releases. I
didn't say anything about unstable or testing releases.
testing/stable refers to the ebuild, not the upstream package. If you
want the latest, install the ~arch ebuild and
On Monday 15 August 2005 10:18, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:37:47 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.
That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before being
marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:28 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
I think some of this confusion is caused by the way people switch
between
two uses of the word stable. It can mean doesn't crash, but then
most
upstream latest packages fit there, and some long standing releases
don't. It can also mean
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:06:59 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before
being marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
Without it, your stable branch would not be.
I am a long time ~arch-only user and have/had less
On Monday 15 August 2005 11:54, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:06:59 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before
being marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
Without it, your stable branch would not be.
I
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:50:00 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
I think some of this confusion is caused by the way people switch
between
two uses of the word stable. It can mean doesn't crash, but then
most
upstream latest packages fit there, and some long standing releases
don't. It can also
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:02:46 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
oh yeah... and don't wait too long with the updates.. less than once
every few days and the problems will pile up... from my humble
experience, it is much less troublesome, to do daily updates, than
weekly ones ;)
Start every
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:02:46 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
oh yeah... and don't wait too long with the updates.. less than once
every few days and the problems will pile up... from my humble
experience, it is much less troublesome, to do daily updates, than
weekly
Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what
packages specifically? Do you know how to unmask unstable packages
(marked M or M~ at packages.gentoo.org)?
ipsec-tools. The current upstream 'release' is 0.6, and 0.6.1 is at
release
Graham Murray wrote:
Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what
packages specifically? Do you know how to unmask unstable packages
(marked M or M~ at packages.gentoo.org)?
ipsec-tools. The current upstream 'release' is 0.6, and
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:28 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:40:49 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
However, when I first used gentoo I was always the first in my LUG to
have the latest kde, evolution, mplayer etc, and that was running x86
not ~x86. My perception is that gentoo
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Paul Hoy wrote:
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good job at
supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases, such as Fedora,
in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
I find that hard to believe...
Linux from Scratch looks
On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 22:00 +0200, Peter Karlsson wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Paul Hoy wrote:
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good job at
supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases, such as
Fedora,
in terms of when it releases updates,
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:58:54 -0400
Paul Hoy wrote:
Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 4 email
updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
the updates, some of them quite significantly. Most of them are
KDE-related files,
That confirms my thoughts
On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 13:11 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:58:54 -0400
Paul Hoy wrote:
Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 4 email
updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
the updates, some of them quite significantly. Most of
Paul Hoy wrote:
My original email was 23/24 packages for x86. However, after reading
your email, I compared the first 10 kde updates with ~x86 releases. It
came out that Fedora was ahead 50 percent of the time or both distros
shared the same release versions. In case I'm doing something
Hi,
Paul Hoy wrote:
On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 13:11 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:58:54 -0400
Paul Hoy wrote:
Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 4 email
updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
the updates, some of them quite
Paul Hoy wrote:
Hi all,
This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants that
share certain characteristics.
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good job
at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases, such as
Fedora, in terms of
On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly support
the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one have any
perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does
anyone wish to share a
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
pretty much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands
down. IMO
What about package management?
--
Neil Bothwick
Bother, said Pooh, as the media exposed
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good
job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,
such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is
On Sunday August 14 2005 4:22 pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
pretty much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands
down. IMO
What about package management?
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Paul,
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what packages
specifically? Do
you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
packages.gentoo.org)?
Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo
Nick Rout schreef:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Paul,
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what packages
specifically? Do
you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
packages.gentoo.org)?
Unstable does not really
On Sunday August 14 2005 4:37 pm, Nick Rout wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500
Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
support the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:
What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
gcc4
since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies got itchy.
Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora...
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sunday August 14 2005 4:38 pm, Nick Rout wrote:
Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
Can you name any version of Linux where version
Holly Bostick wrote:
What would be different in the Gentoo you envision?
I'll bit too. ;-) On the gentoo-dev list I've heard talk of a QA feedback
system so that users can report WORKSFORME on unstable packages. This will
provide the data necessary to help know when packages should be
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
support
the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one
have any
perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:33 PM, Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday August 14 2005 4:22 pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
pretty much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Nick Rout wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Paul,
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what
packages specifically? Do
you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
packages.gentoo.org)?
See inline
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:
Nick Rout schreef:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Paul,
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what
packages specifically? Do
you know how to unmask unstable packages
Paul Hoy schreef:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good
job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,
such as Fedora, in terms
On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote: Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast throughand through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it doesnot constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
On Aug 14, 2005, at 7:26 PM, Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday August 14 2005 5:43 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
support
the latest updates
On Aug 14, 2005, at 9:01 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
Paul Hoy wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty
good job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still
Paul Hoy schreef:
See inline
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:
Nick Rout schreef:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Paul,
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what
packages specifically? Do
you know how to unmask
Paul Hoy wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
not constitute a release of a
On Aug 14, 2005, at 9:34 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:
Paul Hoy schreef:
See inline
On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:
Nick Rout schreef:
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Paul,
Are we really far behind? That's difficult to believe. For what
On Sunday August 14 2005 8:48 pm, Zac Medico wrote:
You can export variables in the shell (not generally recommended) or put
them directly on the command line.
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 emerge -s foo
It's best to use /etc/portage/package.keywords to keep your package
specific keywords
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 18:48 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
Paul Hoy wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
and through, but plonking something
On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 20:55 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
On Sunday August 14 2005 8:48 pm, Zac Medico wrote:
You can export variables in the shell (not generally recommended) or put
them directly on the command line.
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 emerge -s foo
It's best to use
Jerry McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis:
On Sunday 14 August 2005 06:06 pm, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:
What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
gcc4
since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies
On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Paul Hoy wrote
This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants
that share certain characteristics.
I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good
job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other
48 matches
Mail list logo
