Re: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 10:02:45 +0200 From: Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007 [...] So here's my nominations: [...] kosmikus Thank you very much for the nomination. However, I am currently happy whenever time allows me to keep up my regular duties for the Gentoo project. I would not do a good job on the council. Maybe another year ... Cheers, Andres (kosmikus) pgpOg9AL4MyCe.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Final candidate list for Gentoo Council Election 2007
Hello everyone, As far as I can tell, here is the final list of candidates for the Gentoo Council election for the 2006-2007 period : CHTEKK dostrow Flameeyes jaervosz jakub KingTaco kloeri Kugelfang `Kumba lu_zero nattfodd patrick pauldv Pylon Ramereth rl03 robbat2 spb UberLord vapier wolf31o2 Please tell me about any errors. We are a little late in setting up the election software (mostly because noone volunteered to do the election official job so it falls on the usual suspects), but the campaign is open : candidates can post vote for me ! blurbs, stickers can be put up everywhere and you can start making up your minds. -- Thierry Carrez (Koon) Gentoo Council 2005-2006 Member -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Brian Harring wrote: What the hell do you think the tree is? It's a bunch of arbitrary packages maintained loosely by subgroups of people; you're stating that sunrise is too loose yet gentoo-x86 is fundamentally no different. Sunrise is pretty much the same damn thing. Or maybe he means the Gentoo developers are an elite group of flawless people, blessed by the mighty ebuild quizz ? That elitism would in the end kill us, and I thank the Sunrise project for opening up Gentoo a little more to the community. We may have to lose a few elitist fellows in the process, but I still stand by the Council decision that it was the right thing to do. I just can't see how an ebuild directly committed without peer review to the tree is necessary better than an ebuild contributed by a power user and peer-reviewed by a Gentoo developer, ending up in a repository you have to choose to use... -- Koon -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:21:38 +0200 Thierry Carrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Or maybe he means the Gentoo developers are an elite group of | flawless people, blessed by the mighty ebuild quizz ? That elitism | would in the end kill us, and I thank the Sunrise project for opening | up Gentoo a little more to the community. We may have to lose a few | elitist fellows in the process, but I still stand by the Council | decision that it was the right thing to do. The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a mediocre distribution? -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a mediocre distribution? The real world isn't binary. So there's a whole range of alternatives between elitism and mediocrity. Denis. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:41:10 +0200 Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to | be a mediocre distribution? | | The real world isn't binary. So there's a whole range of alternatives | between elitism and mediocrity. But the quality of an overall product is no greater than the quality of its worst part... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] memory leak with gtk+-2.8.20-r1
Hello,
I use gtk+ for my soft's graphic interface.
But valgrind make an log file containing approximately 22700 lines for an
simple source code like :
#include gtk/gtk.h
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
gtk_init(argc, argv);
GtkWidget *win= gtk_window_new(GTK_WINDOW_TOPLEVEL);
g_signal_connect(G_OBJECT(win), destroy, G_CALLBACK(gtk_main_quit),
NULL);
gtk_widget_show_all(win);
gtk_main();
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
It's difficult to write more simple code...
I've made many searchs on the web but nothing information to resolve this
problem.
I've recompiling all with : emerge -e world
downgrading all of X parts and gtk+ glib. But the result are the same.
Visibly the big part of error are in gtk_init - gdk_display_open and
XOpenDisplay in libX11
Someone has the same problem or an solution to solve this leak of memory?
Thank you very much.
It's difficult to write more simple code...
I've made many search on the web but nothing informations to resolve this
problem.
I've recompilling all with : emerge -e world
downgrading all of X parts and gtk+ glib.
But results are the same.
Visibly the most big part of errors are in gtk_init - gdk_display_open and
XOpenDisplay in libX11
Someone has the same problem or an solution to solve this leak of memory?
Thank you very much.
Gwenhaël
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Sunrise contemplations
foser wrote: I checked back on the initial announcement, where it Sunrise was made public as an official Gentoo project without any prior discussion. The announcement actually stated 'This is an announcement - No flamewars allowed'. I guess the creators were already aware of the feelings of some other developers on this issue and decided to just go ahead instead of going through the proper channels (GLEP?) and do things as they wished. As we all know this can be very effective, but this particular time one of the largest and longest ongoing 'discussions' in Gentoo's history ensued. If you know it's flamewar material, why do you go ahead so bluntly with your project ? Why not go trough the proper channels and discuss it beforehand in a public place ? That's just the way to do it. Excerpt from the metastructure model, chosen by the majority of devs last year (and not my model): http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html = A project is a group of developers working towards a goal (or a set of goals). * A project exists if it has a web page at www.g.o/proj/en/whatever that is maintained. (Maintained means that the information on the page is factually correct and not out-of-date.) If the webpage isn't maintained, it is presumed dead. * It may have one or many leads, and the leads are selected by the members of the project. This selection must occur at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any time. * It may have zero or more sub-projects. Sub-projects are just projects that provide some additional structure, and their web pages are in the project's space. * Not everything (or everyone) needs a project. * Projects need not be long-term. * Projects may well conflict with other projects. That's okay. * Any dev may create a new project just by creating a new page (or, more realistically, directory and page) in gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en. = So you can create projects by creating a directory in gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en, you don't have to announce it (but it's polite to do so), and it may well conflict with other projects, that's okay. You can't blame them for following the right rule. You can blame the rule, though. -- Koon -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Sunrise contemplations
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 12:00:56 +0200 Thierry Carrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So you can create projects by creating a directory in | gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en, you don't have to announce it (but it's | polite to do so), and it may well conflict with other projects, | that's okay. | | You can't blame them for following the right rule. You can blame the | rule, though. You're forgetting the other rule about GLEPs being required for changes that impact lots of people... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a mediocre distribution? Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png Cheers. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On 2006.08.02 10:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:41:10 +0200 Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to | be a mediocre distribution? | | The real world isn't binary. So there's a whole range of alternatives | between elitism and mediocrity. The alternative to elitism is extinction, in a binary world. But the quality of an overall product is no greater than the quality of its worst part... So the quality of British Rail trains is no better than the sandwiches they serve ? At least the sandwiches are not safety involved, nor made as if they were. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list Regards, Roy Bamford -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] memory leak with gtk+-2.8.20-r1
On Wed, Aug 2, 2006 at 12:26:57 +0200, gwe wrote: Hello, I use gtk+ for my soft's graphic interface. [...] Someone has the same problem or an solution to solve this leak of memory? Hi, it's best to file a bug at bugs.gentoo.org or post to the gentoo-user mailing list. This list is for development related to gentoo and not for support. Thanks. /Alexandre -- Hi, I'm a .signature virus! Please copy me in your ~/.signature. pgpP6yUppE3rI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a mediocre distribution? Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png but this time he is right, am i gl Cheers. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a mediocre distribution? Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png but he has a valid point. this is not a step forward! Cheers. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you photoshop your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. Ciaranm is like a scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference, reference that outside of irc before. Because that's what everyone who disagrees with him says right? Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet you've taken that and posted it in this discussion to insult him in this everyday situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're so funny! -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] RT2X00_DEVICE USE_EXPAND
Seeing as this requires discussion according to make.defaults The rt2x00 cvs driver supports various RT wireless chipsets and the user should be able to control which one gets installed. This is also important as the cvs portion of a specific driver may break over time. I've already modified the ebuild AND added the rt2x00_devices.desc file. I only found out this apparently requires discussion after the fact. So lets discuss :) Let's also discuss why I cannot just add rtx2x00_devices_rt2500pci to use.local.desc without prior discussion which for my purposes has the same effect. Thanks -- Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Linux Developer (baselayout, networking) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] RT2X00_DEVICE USE_EXPAND
Roy Marples wrote: Seeing as this requires discussion according to make.defaults The rt2x00 cvs driver supports various RT wireless chipsets and the user should be able to control which one gets installed. This is also important as the cvs portion of a specific driver may break over time. I've already modified the ebuild AND added the rt2x00_devices.desc file. I only found out this apparently requires discussion after the fact. So lets discuss :) Let's also discuss why I cannot just add rtx2x00_devices_rt2500pci to use.local.desc without prior discussion which for my purposes has the same effect. Perhaps because other options exist? I'd have suggested WIRELESS_DEVICES (or even ETHERNET_DEVICES or NET_DEVICES) instead, which would work for your case and also be applicable to other packages. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] RT2X00_DEVICE USE_EXPAND
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:09, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Perhaps because other options exist? I'd have suggested WIRELESS_DEVICES (or even ETHERNET_DEVICES or NET_DEVICES) instead, which would work for your case and also be applicable to other packages. Well, they are specific drivers from the rt2x00 package (rt2400, rt2500pci+usb, rt61, rt73 + rfkill support). I very much doubt that anything outside of rt2x00 would ever use those flags. Other network drivers appear to have one tarball for each device, whereas rt2x00 is an all-in-one type approach. -- Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Linux Developer (baselayout, networking) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)
On Monday 31 July 2006 04:28, Dan Meltzer wrote: I do not see why it is considdered hard for users to get involved. Users have at least two choices that I can think of right now, and probably a number that I cannot think of. 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency they desire, contributing to gentoo casually. And the patch hanging in bugzilla forever because no-one wants to maintain it. Sunrise could help here, by accepting properly written ebuilds that do however not get maintenance. Sunrise should not really be about replacing current ebuilds, but offering some support for those packages that are useful for some, but that do not have enough usage that a developer wants to put it into the tree. 2) Users can take the quizzes and become a developer, I do not see why two quizzes is considdered an insurmountable task, the quizzes are specifically designed to ensure that people writing ebuilds understand what ebuilds can contain and what they cannot, I could not imagine a user wanting to install a package from an ebuild written by someone that does not know this. They first need to be invited to start the whole process. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpTSDLQV40v3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:27, Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Monday 31 July 2006 04:28, Dan Meltzer wrote: 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency they desire, contributing to gentoo casually. And the patch hanging in bugzilla forever because no-one wants to maintain it. Sunrise could help here, by accepting properly written ebuilds that do however not get maintenance. How does that help? User goes to bugzilla or User goes to sunrise User still has to go somewhere outside of the tree. Thanks -- Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Linux Developer (baselayout, networking) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On Monday 31 July 2006 08:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Knowing what the problem is is part of making the solution. The problem is not that users can't push arbitrary content into a centralised official repository with no oversight from the herds appropriate for said content quickly enough. I didn't claim to know exactly what the real problem is, merely that it's not what's being solved here. Herds do not have turfs. They specialise in particular areas but that doesn't mean that all packages in that area have to fall under the herd. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpjmmuU20zMl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Sunrise contemplations
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 07:07:31 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | One could argue that since the metastructure policy was approved more | recently, anything in it that contradicts previous rules takes | precedence. Freedom to make new projects anytime beats must use | GLEP for significant new feature. The metastructure policy doesn't override anything it doesn't explicitly say it overrides... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] RT2X00_DEVICE USE_EXPAND
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 10:21, Roy Marples wrote: On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:09, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Perhaps because other options exist? I'd have suggested WIRELESS_DEVICES (or even ETHERNET_DEVICES or NET_DEVICES) instead, which would work for your case and also be applicable to other packages. Well, they are specific drivers from the rt2x00 package (rt2400, rt2500pci+usb, rt61, rt73 + rfkill support). I very much doubt that anything outside of rt2x00 would ever use those flags. Other network drivers appear to have one tarball for each device, whereas rt2x00 is an all-in-one type approach. if nothing else uses them, what's wrong with local USE flags ? -mike pgpwm3v57z81e.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Sunrise contemplations
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 03:55:44PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 07:07:31 -0700 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | One could argue that since the metastructure policy was approved more | recently, anything in it that contradicts previous rules takes | precedence. Freedom to make new projects anytime beats must use | GLEP for significant new feature. The metastructure policy doesn't override anything it doesn't explicitly say it overrides... I guess this project may be a grey area considering if a GLEP is neccessary or not, but then the decision was made by the council based on the input of the developer community, which seems to be pretty close to the GLEP process. Not everything can and will ever be covered by some policy. There already are some examples where making up policies to cover up single incidents went terribly wrong anyway. cheers, Wernfried -- Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org pgppqJeovd036.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 05:50, Richard Fish wrote: Nothing that I have read about sunrise, either in GWN, their project pages, or the FAQ, has given me the impression that they are urging all users to give it a try. There is certainly some advertising about it, as would be appropriate for any new Gentoo project. But nothing that I would say gives the slightest hint of pushiness. Well, as long as there's no big fat warning that there's not support, no security team backing it up - and that the overlay is not meant for general consumption, it's very problematic. On the contrary, it's written down that the overlay is meant to make a wide range of ebuilds easily available - without any measures to secure its consumers. Carsten pgphw9JvVbUt5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
First I'd like to state that I do offer my opinion. You don't have to like it, but disqualifying it as flaming, while exactly doing this yourself, disqualifies you. I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial discussion, without starting to loose your manners. On Wednesday 02 August 2006 03:39, Brian Harring wrote: 1) no security, Suggest you read their responses, and look into some of their material (in particular their faq). Two levels. One, holding area (essentially). Second level (what users get), is the reviewed branch. So... if you're arguing people can stick malicious shit into the first level, yes, they could. [...] You haven't read what I wrote, as I asked you to do. My point isn't that people add malicious ebuilds to the overlay. There're more subtle methods anyway, given that the tree still isn't signed. I wrote about vulnerablities in the upstream software, neither having a security team backing them up nor GLSA's to be written. And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit, And I'm sick of people, who miss the point. 2) issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam You're not supposed to change the exposed api of eclasses in the tree (something y'all do violate I might add, which is a seperate QA matter). Same issue applies to the 'official' overlays offered by devs also, and to the tree in general. We can change eclasses all the time, assuming all relevant ebuilds in the tree get adjusted - just that no one cares for any overlay. It's a reaching statement, bluntly. Using such an arguement has the side affect of stating that no overlays should ever exist, because they suffer the same potentials. Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine (assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do. 3) the fact that sunrise is a bunch of arbitrary packages, instead close related ones managed by one team, that does exactly maintain relevant packages. What the hell do you think the tree is? It's a bunch of arbitrary packages maintained loosely by subgroups of people; you're stating that sunrise is too loose yet gentoo-x86 is fundamentally no different. Sunrise is pretty much the same damn thing. Exactly that isn't right. No one cares for compatibility of the main tree (eclasses, conflicts between ebuilds with regards to installed files) and Sunrise ebuilds. Carsten pgppgHR1KggPH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you photoshop your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. Ciaranm is like a scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference, reference that outside of irc before. Because that's what everyone who disagrees with him says right? Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet you've taken that and posted it in this discussion to insult him in this everyday situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're so funny! There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your tirade). That you don't seem aware of its existence and decided to exhibit this ignorance publicly is yet another reason I believe you should retire as a Gentoo developer. Please, you're hurting Gentoo. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)
On 8/2/06, Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:27, Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Monday 31 July 2006 04:28, Dan Meltzer wrote: 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency they desire, contributing to gentoo casually. And the patch hanging in bugzilla forever because no-one wants to maintain it. Sunrise could help here, by accepting properly written ebuilds that do however not get maintenance. How does that help? User goes to bugzilla or User goes to sunrise User still has to go somewhere outside of the tree. Thanks http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#ButBugzillaisactuallyeasier -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Alex Tarkovsky wrote: On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you photoshop your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. Ciaranm is like a scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference, reference that outside of irc before. Because that's what everyone who disagrees with him says right? Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet you've taken that and posted it in this discussion to insult him in this everyday situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're so funny! There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your tirade). That you don't seem aware of its existence and decided to exhibit this ignorance publicly is yet another reason I believe you should retire as a Gentoo developer. Please, you're hurting Gentoo. I'd prefer you both take your retorts offlist, as neither are on topic here. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 02:53:58PM -0500, Alex Tarkovsky wrote: http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#ButBugzillaisactuallyeasier says: We do think that Sunrise is easier. [..] But in contrast to that it requires more knowledge and tools to get something into sunrise - more work for contributors. Also contributors have to get their ebuilds reviewed before committing - bugzilla is easier here. So perhaps some things are more complicated and each solution has their (dis-)advantages. Hence it's not always best to drop a line to a FAQ to prove a point. cheers, Wernfried -- Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org pgpHxUNjJIVQu.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 14:49:19 -0500 Alex Tarkovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... | | http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png | | Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you | photoshop your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. | Ciaranm is like a scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard | anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never | heard anyone reference, reference that outside of irc before. | Because that's what everyone who disagrees with him says right? | Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet you've taken that and | posted it in this discussion to insult him in this everyday | situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come up | with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, | any George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're | hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God | you're so funny! | | There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your | tirade). No no. Stephen's post was beautifully ironic satire. Yours was just a lame attempt at flamebait. Try sticking Because that is so fresh. into Google... | That you don't seem aware of its existence and decided to | exhibit this ignorance publicly is yet another reason I believe you | should retire as a Gentoo developer. Please, you're hurting Gentoo. Again, no, it's a sign that you don't get it and you should keep quiet until you do. You're filling this list up with noise and not contributing anything to the discussion. Please stop. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 14:49:19 -0500 Alex Tarkovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard... | Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! | There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your | tirade). No no. Stephen's post was beautifully ironic satire. ZOMG! This this to gentoo-blurb or whatever else, this thread is long enough as it is even without this off-topic junk. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] metastructure model (was Re: Sunrise contemplations)
On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 12:00:56 +0200 Thierry Carrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excerpt from the metastructure model, chosen by the majority of devs last year (and not my model): [...] * It may have one or many leads, and the leads are selected by the members of the project. This selection must occur at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any time. [...] While we're on the subject of the metastructure model, could we consider changing this rule? It's a little strict, and I suspect it's honoured more in the breach than otherwise (by which I mean some, perhaps many, projects don't bother to hold a selection process every 12 months). The 12 month rule makes perfect sense for the council and foundation trustees but it's over the top as a rule for all projects. I would suggest something along the lines of, selection of leadership of a project can occur at any time, but can be forced should a majority of the team feel a new selection is necessary, perhaps with a rider allowing projects to setup stricter rules if they feel the need. I'm assuming (since I haven't checked) that project membership requires agreement of the project (i.e. people can't just join a project without the existing project members' agreement). The idea being that if the current leadership want to step down they can do so and selection occurs within the project by default. At the other extreme, if a lead becomes a pita for everyone else on the project, the rest of the project can oust the lead by majority decision (hopefully a rare occurrence). -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Treecleaner Maskings
* Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: snip is this list auto-generated or evrything done by hand ? cu -- - Enrico Weigelt== metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ - Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ - -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] metastructure model (was Re: Sunrise contemplations)
Kevin F. Quinn wrote: On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 12:00:56 +0200 Thierry Carrez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Excerpt from the metastructure model, chosen by the majority of devs last year (and not my model): [...] * It may have one or many leads, and the leads are selected by the members of the project. This selection must occur at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any time. [...] While we're on the subject of the metastructure model, could we consider changing this rule? It's a little strict, and I suspect it's honoured more in the breach than otherwise (by which I mean some, perhaps many, projects don't bother to hold a selection process every 12 months). The 12 month rule makes perfect sense for the council and foundation trustees but it's over the top as a rule for all projects. I would suggest something along the lines of, selection of leadership of a project can occur at any time, but can be forced should a majority of the team feel a new selection is necessary, perhaps with a rider allowing projects to setup stricter rules if they feel the need. I'm assuming (since I haven't checked) that project membership requires agreement of the project (i.e. people can't just join a project without the existing project members' agreement). The idea being that if the current leadership want to step down they can do so and selection occurs within the project by default. At the other extreme, if a lead becomes a pita for everyone else on the project, the rest of the project can oust the lead by majority decision (hopefully a rare occurrence). One nice thing about the 12-month model is that it's harder to get on bad terms with a lead that you'd rather wasn't the lead anymore. It's less of a feeling of conspiring to oust them and more of a feeling of Well, they didn't win the election this time around. However, it's easy to avoid the election if nobody else accepts a nomination, as happened in the desktop project. That saves all the hassle. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] last ritest for dev-java/saxon-bin
* Petteri R?ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: dev-java/saxon-bin is going to be removed from the tree as soon as the from sources version dev-java/saxon gets marked stable on arches that have saxon-bin stable. I will add a package move and a revision bump so that user will have a smooth upgrade. I will also adjust app-text/jing to work with the from sources version. Are such things also announced separately on some user list ? The problem I see: from the view of an common user (who's not reading the dev lists) packages they're using suddenly disappear. They don't have time to handle it properly. There should be an additional flagging (ie. scheduled for masking or removal), maybe such flags could be put into an separate database (ie. some textfile available via web or rsync). An tool could check if the current system has some of those scheduled packages installed. cu -- - Enrico Weigelt== metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ - Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ - -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] last ritest for dev-java/saxon-bin
Enrico Weigelt wrote: * Petteri R?ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: dev-java/saxon-bin is going to be removed from the tree as soon as the from sources version dev-java/saxon gets marked stable on arches that have saxon-bin stable. I will add a package move and a revision bump so that user will have a smooth upgrade. I will also adjust app-text/jing to work with the from sources version. Are such things also announced separately on some user list ? The problem I see: from the view of an common user (who's not reading the dev lists) packages they're using suddenly disappear. They don't have time to handle it properly. There should be an additional flagging (ie. scheduled for masking or removal), maybe such flags could be put into an separate database (ie. some textfile available via web or rsync). Things scheduled for removal (by treecleaners, and I hope by many) enter pmask prior to removal; this is really the current system of notification. An tool could check if the current system has some of those scheduled packages installed. cu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Treecleaner Maskings
Enrico Weigelt wrote: * Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: snip is this list auto-generated or evrything done by hand ? This mailing list? Yes. It's auto-generated by monkeys... that's why there's so many darn messages on there. Occasionally Jeff's (jforman) goats will come and help the monkeys out when we need to ramp up the volume. Hence the phrase... given an infinite amount of monkey's typing for an infinite amount of time, the Gentoo mailing lists will be recreated. Oh wait, we were talking about treecleaners... not the mailing list... Disregard. -- Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-im/aim masked for removal
* Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: I've masked net-im/aim, AOL's proprietary offering. It hasn't seen a release in years, it's binary-only, and it's far less capable than any other client out there. BTW: could be introduce an separate (optional) masking method for such proprietary stuff ? I personally don't want to have such stuff on my system, but I'm really too lazy for check each package I intend to install by its own. Would also be cool to have database for those things which is easy to query. cu -- - Enrico Weigelt== metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/ - Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce: http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions: http://patches.metux.de/ - -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-im/aim masked for removal
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 16:12, Enrico Weigelt wrote: * Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: I've masked net-im/aim, AOL's proprietary offering. It hasn't seen a release in years, it's binary-only, and it's far less capable than any other client out there. BTW: could be introduce an separate (optional) masking method for such proprietary stuff ? I believe (don't have time to check right now) you'll want to look into ACCEPT_LICENSE -- # # electronerd, the electronerdian from electronerdia # pgp8QFgybgbNl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-im/aim masked for removal
Enrico Weigelt wrote: BTW: could be introduce an separate (optional) masking method for such proprietary stuff ? I personally don't want to have such stuff on my system, but I'm really too lazy for check each package I intend to install by its own. Would also be cool to have database for those things which is easy to query. I suppose what you want is true enforcement of ACCEPT_LICENSE, in which you specify acceptable licenses. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: last ritest for dev-java/saxon-bin
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 02 Aug 2006 18:45:59 +: Enrico Weigelt wrote: * Petteri R?ty [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: dev-java/saxon-bin is going to be removed from the tree as soon as the from sources version dev-java/saxon gets marked stable on arches that have saxon-bin stable. I will add a package move and a revision bump so that user will have a smooth upgrade. I will also adjust app-text/jing to work with the from sources version. Are such things also announced separately on some user list ? The problem I see: from the view of an common user (who's not reading the dev lists) packages they're using suddenly disappear. They don't have time to handle it properly. There should be an additional flagging (ie. scheduled for masking or removal), maybe such flags could be put into an separate database (ie. some textfile available via web or rsync). Things scheduled for removal (by treecleaners, and I hope by many) enter pmask prior to removal; this is really the current system of notification. Just to add... 30 days is the usual package mask. As AW states, the idea of the mask is so users will have time after masking to save the masked ebuild to their overlay and/or file a bug saying they use it, as well as that it's a wake-up call for any devs, if they want it saved, to get busy and take over maintenance and start fixing the bugs that having remained unfixed for so long, got the package masked in the first place. If a user isn't syncing and updating at least once a month, well... the ebuilds and related files remain available from viewCVS, which is open to the public, so they can still be retrieved and stuck in an overlay, if necessary, and Gentoo devs can of course fix the bugs and return the ebuild to the tree, if they believe it's worth it. The files aren't gone without a trace, forever. All that said, IMO these qualify for announcements as much as the GLSAs normally inhabiting the announce list do. That list isn't glsa, it's announce and these are announcements that could affect a number of users, so IMO they belong there as well as here. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-im/aim masked for removal
On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 16:18:04 -0700 John Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 02 August 2006 16:12, Enrico Weigelt wrote: * Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: I've masked net-im/aim, AOL's proprietary offering. It hasn't seen a release in years, it's binary-only, and it's far less capable than any other client out there. BTW: could be introduce an separate (optional) masking method for such proprietary stuff ? I believe (don't have time to check right now) you'll want to look into ACCEPT_LICENSE http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17367 pgpftTnRA6JrJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last ritest for dev-java/saxon-bin
Duncan wrote: Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 02 Aug 2006 18:45:59 +: All that said, IMO these qualify for announcements as much as the GLSAs normally inhabiting the announce list do. That list isn't glsa, it's announce and these are announcements that could affect a number of users, so IMO they belong there as well as here. Too bad posted stuff to announce is a huge pita :) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: First I'd like to state that I do offer my opinion. You don't have to like it, but disqualifying it as flaming, while exactly doing this yourself, disqualifies you. *cough*. bit hypocritical for you to lecture me about viewing your statements as 'flaming', and in the same breath label my own as 'flaming' ;) Why am I pointing this out? My initial points were that of why the double standard, with you providing an apt example (while that's barbed, you did provide a perfect refresher of the definition). I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial discussion, without starting to loose your manners. And I'd appreciate a less condescending tone. On Wednesday 02 August 2006 03:39, Brian Harring wrote: 1) no security, Suggest you read their responses, and look into some of their material (in particular their faq). Two levels. One, holding area (essentially). Second level (what users get), is the reviewed branch. So... if you're arguing people can stick malicious shit into the first level, yes, they could. [...] You haven't read what I wrote, as I asked you to do. You wrote 'no security'. That's pretty fricking vague, can cover everything from no verification of sync'd contents, to their vcs security, to their screening processes, to vulns in their packages. If you wanted to home in vulns in the source (which isn't security as much as 'vulnerabilities in the source'), be explicit. Now on to the real points (yay)... My point isn't that people add malicious ebuilds to the overlay. There're more subtle methods anyway, given that the tree still isn't signed. I wrote about vulnerablities in the upstream software, neither having a security team backing them up nor GLSA's to be written. 1) same issue with the ebuilds sitting in bugzilla, going to hunt through bugzie marking each submitted ebuild when a security bug hits? 2) Response to that is that there is no claim of support- which is the same for sunrise. Why are the rules different for sunrise then? 3) Assumption that sunrise will just be a dumping ground, without any form of maintainance is implicit here- if it becomes as such, already was stated it would get wedgied by the council. So that leaves the angle of they don't have a security team, which implies to actually handle nuking vulnerable ebuilds, one has to have a security team (obviously false). Besides... frankly it's kind of BS to push the vuln angle onto sunrise when gentoo can't even clean out years old vulnerable packages from gentoo-x86 (that doesn't absolve sunrise from having to watch it, nor a potshot at the understaffed security team, merely that double standards suck). You want to set a standard for 'em, fine, lets use the standard of the existing tree when compared to existing glsas- note that there may be vulns that gentoo doesn't have glsas for, or vulns that are in the security pipeline and haven't yet been issued as a glsa (since gentoo issues it after porting). 285 versions out of 24637 vulnerable (~1 out of every 86 vuln) 115 packages out of 11251 vulnreable (~1 out of every 98 vuln) http://gentooexperimental.org/~ferringb/vuln.log So... if that's the standard you want to hold them to, fine, state so- they may agree to it (although admittedly such a standard is stupid, there should be _no_ vuln packages). Don't automatically assume they'll be worse however, let alone assume that gentoo-x86 is perfect (again, no double standards). And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit, And I'm sick of people, who miss the point. As stated above, be concise then. Your points came out of pretty much nowhere, poorly communicated, and rather vague in actually backing them up. Which... at least from the backing up the complaints, has been the theme for the screaming folk thus far. If people are missing the point, there are two possibilities- either A) everyone else is a moron and too stupid to understand your points, or more likely B) you're communicating poorly. Assuming that the other party is the idiot (a) when more likely then not it's you (B) isn't really a good way to try and get your say. 2) issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam You're not supposed to change the exposed api of eclasses in the tree (something y'all do violate I might add, which is a seperate QA matter). Same issue applies to the 'official' overlays offered by devs also, and to the tree in general. We can change eclasses all the time, assuming all relevant ebuilds in the tree get adjusted - just that no one cares for any overlay. No, actually you cannot. Just because you update the tree doesn't mean you're not going and breaking binpkgs, or the vdb installation. Read glep33 if you want the sordid back history and solution to it. Like I said, y'all violate it, doesn't mean it's right. It's a
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Brian Harring wrote: On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: First I'd like to state that I do offer my opinion. You don't have to like it, but disqualifying it as flaming, while exactly doing this yourself, disqualifies you. *cough*. bit hypocritical for you to lecture me about viewing your statements as 'flaming', and in the same breath label my own as 'flaming' ;) Why am I pointing this out? My initial points were that of why the double standard, with you providing an apt example (while that's barbed, you did provide a perfect refresher of the definition). I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial discussion, without starting to loose your manners. And I'd appreciate a less condescending tone. Can you two please stop with this child-like circle of blame? Its really starting to get old. You don't need to have the last word on every argument (either of you). If neither of you can agree, then just agree to disagree. *gasp* Yes, that is an option in a technical debate. No matter what either of you two think is technically right, you're both right and both wrong. /me goes back to lurking -- Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Brian Harring wrote: On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine (assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do. Why are they problematic? Because of your assumption that they won't maintain it? It's the same thing as gentoo-x86 (I will keep stating that till it's grilled into peoples heads also), this is _not_ a new issue so why are people leveling issues of gentoo-x86 as new issues of sunrise? So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks something for sunrise. Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work. I think the point a lot of people are concerned about are packages that contain libraries or other dependencies that reside in the sunrise tree. There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a bug arises. Who's fault is it? Is it the package maintainer in the regular tree, or sunrise? How do you stop excessive bug traffic for issues like this? Another issue I think people are ignoring here is the fact that sunrise isn't focused on a particular part of the tree. I think Ciaran made a point earlier (that was probably ignored) about the fact of why we have herds in the regular tree. They aren't perfect, but they still do a decent job of gathering people who have a good understand about a certain group of packages. I have a hard time believing that the same type of quality exists with the number of devs working on it. The difference between sunrise and say the php overlay is the fact that sunrise isn't focused on a set of packages (just ones that people want that aren't in the tree) compared to a focused set for a specific purpose (php). The more I think about it, I think there needs to be a separation between a sandbox for users to hone their ebuild skills and these packages aren't in the tree yet, lets make the available somewhere else. Perhaps the better solution is to have the herds manage their own set of overlays must like php does. I imagine many herds won't have a need for it, while others would (and probably already using it). What's the real purpose of sunrise then? The sandbox/learning ground? Or a place for ebuilds that are stuck in bugs? The sunrise project has been fighting on the grounds of learning aspect, but most of the people are having issues with the ebuild stomping ground side. If I remember right, the primary reason the council voted to re-enact sunrise was because of the learning side of it. I don't doubt that (if done right) would be a great thing, but I have concerns on the implementation of the latter. For an example: To me, it would work better if the netmon herd brought on a user to help with the netmon overlay. They would get specific 'training' on working on netmon ebuilds. They could have done the 'bootcamp' at sunrise initially, then moved onto the herd overlay for something a bit more organized and better maintained. This would produce a part of the QA that some people are in a fuss about, and some better organization. Heck, maybe even some interaction with the sunrise group and netmon herd would be great so that the education continues, but on other watchful eyes. Basically, it boils down to organization of ebuilds and how they are being watched. A group that watches all isn't a good idea to me, my idea above makes more sense. Anyways, I've been trying to keep quiet on this issue and decided I could interject here :) Cheers- -- Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] The gnome king is dead, long live the gnome king
foser wrote: [Mon Jul 31 2006, 04:20:14PM EDT] tonight after a some deliberation I have decided to step down as gnome lead in favor of AllanonJL. Thanks for leading Gentoo's Gnome for so long, foser. thanks for your time, Marinus This must be a pretty serious announcement; I don't think I've ever seen you sign your name to an email :-) Aron -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 10:27:04PM -0500, Lance Albertson wrote: Brian Harring wrote: On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine (assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do. Why are they problematic? Because of your assumption that they won't maintain it? It's the same thing as gentoo-x86 (I will keep stating that till it's grilled into peoples heads also), this is _not_ a new issue so why are people leveling issues of gentoo-x86 as new issues of sunrise? So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks something for sunrise. Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work. I think the point a lot of people are concerned about are packages that contain libraries or other dependencies that reside in the sunrise tree. There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a bug arises. http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq Specifically, for those who haven't done their reading, look for the Can I commit everything I like to the overlay, specifically the rules involved for what goes in. The short and skiny is that the arguement of they'll have some package that breaks my package is kind of daft- sunrise won't hold version bumps for packages in the tree (one exception to this is maintainer-needed that has sat, perhaps they can clarify that corner case). For the maintainer-wanted, the developer who pulls the package in *should* be lifting from sunrise already. Why? Because whats there has actually been exposed to users, rather then them relying on a simple eyeballing of the ebuild from bugzilla instead. That leaves the will link against a package from sunrise... covered the potentials above, the remaining case is a package in the tree linking against a maintainer-needed ebuild. Funny thing, that's actually a bug in the developers package. Daft I know, but it's actually a *good* thing to smoke those out, there should be no unstated linkage (if it ain't in the deps, it's a bug to use/link to it). Who's fault is it? Is it the package maintainer in the regular tree, or sunrise? How do you stop excessive bug traffic for issues like this? Assumption is that there will be excessive bug traffic for issues like that. Rules above imo lay it out well enough I don't think it'll occur at the level of excessive. Basically, sky is falling predictions- no one has hard facts since this is hypothetical, so it would be *nice* if people would at least recognize that they may be barking at a minimal issue. *Plus*, with sunrise under gentoos thumb if it proves to be more trouble then it's worth, the plug can be pulled- that's the trade of it being official, they get hosting, y'all get an actual say in what they do. If they do it externally, ain't much you can do- can't demand they do something (result of that if it were me would be a mooning), stuck requesting them to do what _y'all_ want. Another issue I think people are ignoring here is the fact that sunrise isn't focused on a particular part of the tree. I think Ciaran made a point earlier (that was probably ignored) about the fact of why we have herds in the regular tree. They aren't perfect, but they still do a decent job of gathering people who have a good understand about a certain group of packages. I have a hard time believing that the same type of quality exists with the number of devs working on it. The difference between sunrise and say the php overlay is the fact that sunrise isn't focused on a set of packages (just ones that people want that aren't in the tree) compared to a focused set for a specific purpose (php). What is sunrises reason for existance? It's meant to hold ebuilds that _rot_ in bugzilla in a place where people can work on them as needed, and folks who need the packages can use them. They may get bit in the ass since it's a fairly raw repo (despite reviewed branch), but the purpose here is different; it's not intended as a dumping ground (and if it becomes one, council has stated their intentions), it's intended as a repo for people to get at the ebuilds in an easier way, and improve those ebuilds if there is interest. The more I think about it, I think there needs to be a separation between a sandbox for users to hone their ebuild skills and these packages aren't in the tree yet Honing your ebuild skills occurs via practing said ebuild
[gentoo-dev] atom matching behavior
Repost from gentoo-portage-dev[1]: Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't work as I thought, as for example =foo-1.2* matches foo-1.20 as well as foo-1.2.3. This wouldn't be a bug problem if it could be used as a general glob operator like with =foo-1.2.*, but it's use is strictly limited to the above version (can only be used when a version component separator may appear), so atm there is no facility to reliably lock an atom at a specific version component when you have to account for multi-digit components. Now the question is if we want this glob-style behavior or not. From the code comments it seems to be intentional, but I'd suspect that many people share my original assumption and expect it to only match full version components (as that is the much more common use case). Doesn't help that the atom description in ebuild(5) doesn't specify the behavior for this case either, * means match any version of the package so long as the specified base is matched can be read both ways. Opinions? Marius [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel/2231/focus=2231 -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed again (was Resignation)
Lance Albertson wrote: I think the point a lot of people are concerned about are packages that contain libraries or other dependencies that reside in the sunrise tree. There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a bug arises. Who's fault is it? Is it the package maintainer in the regular tree, or sunrise? How do you stop excessive bug traffic for issues like this? You create `emerge --info` output that details any packages on the system installed from an overlay. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] test request - gnutls-1.4.1 and libtasn1-0.3.4
I've added new versions of these libs to gentoo. They are currently in package.mask because I've missed a few bumps versions in between and there is an ABI change. Some old deprecated functions have been removed. So far these have been working for me fine however I'd appreciate your assistance in further testing these before I unmask them. To participate please: 1. add ~net-libs/gnutls-1.4.1 ~dev-libs/libtasn1-0.3.4 to /etc/portage/package.unmask and /etc/portage/package.keywords files. 2. run revdep-rebuild 3. and report bugs on bugs.gentoo.org Appreciate your assistance in this manner. -- Daniel Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Crypto/Forensics/NetMon pgp2RuDS8uZqg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] atom matching behavior
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:07:35AM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: Repost from gentoo-portage-dev[1]: Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't work as I thought, as for example =foo-1.2* matches foo-1.20 as well as foo-1.2.3. This wouldn't be a bug problem if it could be used as a general glob operator like with =foo-1.2.*, Even if that would be supported, it wouldn't match foo-1.2, unless the meaning of * changes. but it's use is strictly limited to the above version (can only be used when a version component separator may appear), so atm there is no facility to reliably lock an atom at a specific version component when you have to account for multi-digit components. Now the question is if we want this glob-style behavior or not. From the code comments it seems to be intentional, but I'd suspect that many people share my original assumption and expect it to only match full version components (as that is the much more common use case). Doesn't help that the atom description in ebuild(5) doesn't specify the behavior for this case either, * means match any version of the package so long as the specified base is matched can be read both ways. Opinions? Marius For packages with MMDD versions, =c/p-2005* can make sense, and I have used this in the past. Please continue to allow that, and possibly provide an alternative syntax for what you currently expect =c/p-v* to do (=c/p-v.* -- if it doesn't require the . -- being a possibility). -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Atom matching behavior
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 13:19, Brian Harring wrote: On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 12:48:05AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 31 July 2006 23:57, Drake Wyrm wrote: The question I'm trying to ask is this: =foo-1.2.* should obviously match foo-1.2.3, but should it also match on foo-1.2? It seems more _useful_ that the 1.2 version would also match, despite not having the .3 subversion, but perhaps that is not perfectly intuitive from the syntax. portage versions have implicit .0 extension ad infinitum so matching 1.2 would make logical sense as it is really just 1.2.0 ... Err... wrong actually (try emerge -pv =dev-util/diffball-0.6.5 and emerge -pv =dev-util/diffball-0.6.5.0). cpv's don't have implicit .0 extensions, and that should _not_ be changed. when it comes to version comparing, there is implicit .0 extension ... which is what we're talking about here, comparing versions -mike pgpQJGnVPTQDE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Atom matching behavior
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 02:58, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: - =sys-devel/autoconf-2.1* matches autoconf-2.13 (found in net-proxy/privoxy and dev-tcltk/expect) this is because stupid portage lacks SLOT deps - =sys-devel/autoconf-2.5* matches autoconf-2.59 (found in x11-libs/gtk-server and media-plugins/xmms-jack) this too is because SLOT deps are missing, but this is broken anyways as it'll work with autoconf-2.6x ... -mike pgp44n4PDPuyl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Atom matching behavior
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 15:49, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: - =sys-libs/db-1.8* matches 1.85 (found in net-nds/directoryadministrator) - =app-text/docbook-xsl-stylesheets-1.6* matches 1.68.1 and 1.69.1 (found in media-sound/solfege) these should actually be SLOT deps, but portage sucks -mike pgp5ECbXPG1Dw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Atom matching behavior
Brian Harring wrote: Response to this is that well don't have versions like that, which while valid, is ignoring the point- cpvs are exact in their version specification, there isn't anything implicit about them. This sounds to me like 'division through zero doesn't make sense, but i've still got the right to do it'. Really, if anybody is ever going to release 1.0 and 1.0.0 along each other, that person is completely on crack. You can't do 2/0, either can you have 1.0 and 1.0.0 being different versions. They should be the same. That being said, which one is higher? Tag on a (.0)* implicitly, you open up potential issues like above. Nonissue, really. -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Developer -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Atom matching behavior
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: On Tuesday 01 August 2006 15:49, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: - =sys-libs/db-1.8* matches 1.85 (found in net-nds/directoryadministrator) - =app-text/docbook-xsl-stylesheets-1.6* matches 1.68.1 and 1.69.1 (found in media-sound/solfege) these should actually be SLOT deps, but portage sucks -mike I've reopened bug 93469 and I'll be investigating what it will be necessary to implement this. This feature is blocking bug 4698 which is an annoying problem that I'd really like to get fixed. Zac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE0Wtp/ejvha5XGaMRArjGAJ9dEVZ0CnD/2YOdEmXNASnbnWh+TwCcC4zU DylTJfDd/BxApOiBdiYrLbU= =aBzd -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
