Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer features in portage: cgroup, network-sandbox, ipc-sandbox
This sounds like cool stuff... I wonder if this could be a step towards unprivileged users being able to use portage for user-installed apps.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Making systemd more accessible to normal users
On Mon, May 20, 2013, at 11:03 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote: That's missing the point. If you don't run systemd, having unit files is pointless. Thankfully there's INSTALL_MASK and whatnot, but that seems like a hack instead of something more robust. Why include systemd unit files (by default, with no systemd USE flag, thanks to the council...) on a system that's not using it? 154 files isn't negligible unless you're flippant with your system and don't care about bloat. Unused software sitting around *is* a waste of disk-space. You've either won the Unreasonably Pedantic Award or the Will Say Any Stupid Thing Prove His/Her Point Award. Please let me know which one to send to you. -a
Re: [gentoo-dev] splashutils needs a maintainer
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013, at 02:24 PM, Dustin C. Hatch wrote: On 2/2/2013 13:19, Pacho Ramos wrote: El mar, 29-01-2013 a las 15:55 +0400, Sergey Popov escribió: 28.01.2013 23:26, Pacho Ramos пишет: Then, looks like no alternative is in good shape on Gentoo. What is Sabayon using? They look to have plymouth ebuilds in their overlay (but not in for-gentoo one, then, it probably has some incompatibility Gentoo :/) We have plymouth ebuilds in tree, but they are outdated(see https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=430478). Could anyone summarize the advantages of splashutils over plymouth? As both look to be needed of some love in Gentoo, maybe would be better to focus on later one (that is the preferred option in most distributions and is actively developed) As a user, I can say that one advantage of splashutils over plymouth is that I could never get the latter to work, whereas the former has worked on every machine I've tried to use it on (server, desktop, and virtual machine). IIRC plymouth requires KMS so if your driver doesn't have KMS support then it doesn't have plymouth support.
Re: [gentoo-dev] revdep-rebuild bikeshedding
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013, at 03:57 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: [...] +1 on the replace. +1
Re: [gentoo-dev] Inspiration
On Wed, 2012-09-19 at 22:12 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: So what is the Zen of Gentoo? How about: My set-up is better than your set-up/sarcasm ;-) -a
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: DistroWatch and Gentoo packages: status quo and future
On Sun, 2009-09-13 at 09:36 -0500, Dale wrote: Seriously, I doubt that the average Gentoo user comes from Distrowatch. Gentoo is born from a necessity which is very different from the usual binary distro. Gentoo has never been about fame or marketing. - - I came here because of distrowatch. I started with Mandrake 9.1 but didn't like the upgrade process. I went to distrowatch to see what else I could find to use. I found about about Gentoo and here I am, years later using Gentoo. What do our market research people tell us? ;-) -a
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo's problems
[Oh no! How did I let myself get sucked into a gentoo-dev thread? ;-)] On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 13:31 -0700, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: [...] I'll just throw out a couple of my own comments: [ I'm skipping the first one because it doesn't interest me] [Comment about Gentoo's non-participation in LSB] While I somewhat agree, I think Gentoo's main selling point (at least for me) is that is the way it stands out from your typical Linux distro. It's source-based package system was once what distinguished it from the rest. In summary, I don't think Gentoo should totally adapt to what the rest are going any more than I think Slackware or GoboLinux should. What I do see is that perhaps there are ideas that Gentoo has that maybe other distros could benefit from, and vice versa. But sometimes we have to agree to disagree with mainstream. As for enterprise... that's fine. Gentoo has traditionally been the kind of distro that throws you just enough rope to hang oneself, so I never really considered it an enterprise Linux, but if that is the direction that it wants to head in then it benefit it to make it more known to the general public. [Stuff about distrowatch, other distros and market share...] Gentoo share of mind is dropping and dropping rapidly, although I don't think it's because of misbehavior in the community. I think it's because: a. Daniel Robbins left and went to Microsoft, leaving no Mr. Gentoo, and I would generalize this more. I would say that Mr. Gentoo isn't/wasn't Daniel Robbins but Larry, and in recent times Larry has not enlightened us with his vision of Gentoo and where it's going. We have http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml but where do we go from there? Maybe we need to have a sit down with Larry so we can know what Gentoo really is. b. No effort to seek corporate support, at least none that I'm aware of. I would also like to generalize this more. Instead of corporate support I would say funding, whether it's corporate or what. I think it's important to convince people that they should give us money, and we should have the wisdom and capability of receiving said money and doing something productive with it. In short, I'm not sure there is any future for *any* pure community distro. Somehow Gentoo needs to at least find a marketable defendable niche and some kind of corporate sponsorship. Maybe embedded will turn out to be that niche -- I'd love to have even 1/4 of Portage on something like a Zaurus or iPhone. It's NFP, but even NFP has to have some sort of structure and unified vision. Even my neighborhood coop has decent solidarity and a marketing strategy. -- Albert W. Hopkins -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] init.d problem
On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 18:58 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Tuesday 04 July 2006 18:43, Enrico Weigelt wrote: We should think about mechanisms to check if the service is actually running. This could also be used for frequently service checks and notification. there is no fool proof way to do this Has anyone considered daemontools? It does this kind of stuff very well. -m -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Which license?
On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 14:21 -0400, A. Khattri wrote: Im working on an ebuild for a package and Im not sure what license to use. The package is Copyright Company X but has this underneath: ## This software may be freely copied, modified and redistributed ## without fee for non-commerical purposes provided that this license ## remains intact and unmodified with any distribution. ## ## There is no warranty or other guarantee of fitness of this software. ## It is provided solely as is. The author(s) disclaim(s) all ## responsibility and liability with respect to this software's usage ## or its effect upon hardware, computer systems, other software, or ## anything else. ## Last time I looked, there were some 800 or so files in /usr/portage/license/ - so which one would I use? I'd go for AS-IS. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Looking for a vile maintainer
LOL. Sorry, subject line gave me the chuckles. -m -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 22:51 +0100, Francesco R. wrote: my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16 and for the one will come with the dev-db/mysql-4.1.15-r1 ebuild I'm confused. MySQL 5 seems to have been available on ~amd64 for quite sometime. I've already converted my database files the the 5.x format. Now all-of-the-sudden MySQL 5 is marked -amd64 so now I must downgrade. Is this intentional? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16
On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 17:32 +0100, Simon Stelling wrote: Albert Hopkins wrote: Now all-of-the-sudden MySQL 5 is marked -amd64 so now I must downgrade. Is this intentional? read the changelog, it says: 24 Nov 2005; Jory A. Pratt [EMAIL PROTECTED] mysql-5.0.15.ebuild, mysql-5.0.16-r3.ebuild: version 5 does not work on clean install Is there a guide or something on how to downgrade from version 5 to 4? I'm assuming that I can't just point 4 to my database files and expect them to work. Also why did it take so long to determine that 5 does not work? I've been running 5 on amd64 systems since 21 October without any issues and now I have to figure out how I am going to downgrade. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16
On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 10:51 -0600, Andrew Gaffney wrote: Or you can just unmask it locally and stop whining. I think users have a valid reason to be concerned about this, but if that is the developer's intention (to unmask it locally) then may I suggest this information be provided somehow to the user? Before now the only information I got was it was masked because it doesn't work... even though it has been working, at least for some users, for quite some time. I'm not trying to whine, just to get the what and whys. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about XML files used in portage
On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 09:21 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Wed, 2005-09-21 at 07:28 -0500, Albert Hopkins wrote: 2. Are metadata.xml files a requirement for categories? There are a few categories that do not have one: * x11-proto * x11-apps * x11-drivers They should have one. Ok, then I will submit a bug report to have them added. 3. If a metadata.xml has a longdescription element, is it required to contain text? There is at least one package that has an empty longdescription. I wanted to use the longdescription to override the DESCRIPTION in the .ebuild, if it exists, but in this case the DESCRIPTION is actually infinitely longer than the longdescription. It should contain text, but I don't think that the dtd requires it. Perhaps it should? Admittedly, I have not read the DTD (must first learn *how* to read DTDs), but I think if the element exists, it should have text or else it's meaningless. 4. Speaking of longdescription, are line breaks to be preserved in their representation? There are a few packages whose longdescription use line breaks for formatting. One in particular, gnustep-libs/steptalk not only prefers to preserve line breaks, but also appears to prefer a fixed-width font in it's representation. Is this also a requirement? As far as I know, there are few *requirements* defined for metadata.xml files. All we really have is the dtd to determine what is legal. Anything beyond that really hasn't been discussed. Perhaps now is the time to start such discussions? I think so. There seem to be different formats for the longdescription and I would hate to have to guess or make special exceptions because I know I'll do it wrong (e.g. the Changelogs). Would prefer if there were a more strict definition so then at least I could say it's not my fault ;-) If anyone has answers to any of the above questions I thank you in advance for your response. Just out of curiosity, what is your project? This is for the new packages.gentoo.org. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resolution - GTK Useflag Situation
On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 13:43 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: [...] Your decision to remove the gtk2 use flag takes away control from people who were using it correctly (by what the description said). I'm not against having gtk2 on my systems, but I prefer gtk1 interfaces, primarily as they are a lot more lighter on memory and disk. I use USE='gtk -gtk2', and putting gtk2 in my local package.mask is not acceptable, because I do use applications with interfaces in gtk2 only sometimes. If your system has a way that I can get what I want, then that's fine, but it just doesn't seem to be included in your email. I have a different solution that should, no doubt, satisfy both sides: We fork Gentoo. Create a new distro, called GenOne. This distro will include only older wares such as GTK1, Kernel 2.4, libc5, XFree86, devfs, a.out binaries, DES passwords, etc. It will be just as good as Gentoo, but catered to old-timers and and those who prefer to reminisce about the good ol' days. -m -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resolution - GTK Useflag Situation
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 20:24 +0900, Chris White wrote: [..] Marduk, I have a different solution that should, no doubt, satisfy both sides: We fork Gentoo. Create a new distro, called GenOne. This distro will include only older wares such as GTK1, Kernel 2.4, libc5, XFree86, devfs, a.out binaries, DES passwords, etc. It will be just as good as Gentoo, but catered to old-timers and and those who prefer to reminisce about the good ol' days. This is what we call flaming, please don't waste time with this. It's annoying as hell, ends up making threads longer than they need, and does nothing to benifit the argument. Thanks. Flaming? I wasn't flaming. There's nothing I said that was the least bit insulting or controversial. All that I was doing, for the benefit of the list, is to introduce a little humor with the intent of perhaps getting a chuckle here or there. Ha ha. Some people got it. You didn't. -m -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
