Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On 08/24/2016 10:08, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El mié, 24-08-2016 a las 16:05 +0200, Lars Wendler escribió: >> > [...] >> Oh, and to all new team members: >> Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, >> so >> we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old >> systems. >> >> >> Kind regards >> Lars > > This reminds me a question I have for some time: is it documented in > some place what are the steps to follow for updating old systems? I > remember posts like: > http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/ > > but I don't know if that is "official" or a workaround or... :/ > > Thanks a lot for the info! When I got SGI Octane booting Linux again in 2014, I had a dormant ~2009-era system still installed on that machine. Upgrading was...interesting. Entirely doable -- I think I hand-jammed a modern Portage into it to get started, then incrementally step-upgraded the thing over a period of 2-3 weeks until the system packages were fully working. Then I got torched by gcc's PR61538, where someone's upstream change tripped up an atomic fault on the R1 CPUs these things use, which left me stuck at gcc-4.8.x. That went on for 8 months until someone else upstream accidentally fixed it. Now, I've just got to figure out this irritating 2GB memory DMA bug... But still, depending on the age of the install, it's a task that only the dedicated and OCD should try to tackle. Everyone else is better off salvaging config files by mounting the disks in another system, then nuking the old install from orbit. I'll let you guys now how the next attempt works out, whenever I get my Indigo2 R1 to boot again. I think the Gentoo install on that machine hasn't seen the light of the Kernel since ~2006. Probably earlier. -- Joshua Kinard Gentoo/MIPS ku...@gentoo.org 6144R/F5C6C943 2015-04-27 177C 1972 1FB8 F254 BAD0 3E72 5C63 F4E3 F5C6 C943 "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On 08/25/2016 01:01 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:17:58 + > "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > >> Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today >> it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one >> maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only >> concerned about if the other maintainer is also very busy or not >> available. >> >> Some of these packages are very niche, and while they continue to >> work, they could use a bit more attention than they get presently >> (you might only hear about them when they break and never when they >> work). >> >> They are generally NOT broken and in need of tree-cleaning, but are >> just lacking forward momentum (not a few bugs are reasonable upstream >> bugs or feature improvements). Many were once shiny and had lots of >> people that cared, but that dwindled as they become mundane and just >> expected to work. >> >> General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not >> be a bad outcome from this email either ;-). > > > Count me in then. > > What's the "official" way of joining these days ? > afaict add yourself to the project on the wiki and then the usual mail alias deal. -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Recruiting process (Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care)
On 08/25/2016 11:59 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: > Given that so much needs to be learned and a lot of trust goes into > developers, it's no surprise that we tend to take our time accepting > people. That said, I chalk it up to a manpower problem. As far as I know > the recruiting and proxy-maint teams are dedicated, but small. They do > an awesome job (that I am not cut out for) so they deserve a lot of > respect. But it does indeed seem that scheduling and workloads are not > in sync. Just to add an agreement to this; picking up some packages in maintainer-needed and maintaining it through proxy-maint for a while is a good way to get introduced to workflow and getting reviewed while learning the steps. -- Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP certificate reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Recruiting process (Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care)
On 08/24/2016 08:24 PM, Raymond Jennings wrote: > This...kinda touches on a side issue. I've been a bit waylaid by RL > issues during my quest to become a developer myself, and both of my > prospective mentors had to step aside for the same reason before the > process could finish. > > I'm a little slow on the quizzes and some recent changes in gentoo > invalidated some of my answers, so part of it is my fault for falling > behind. > > But I was kinda wondering, is there anything that can be done to beef up > the manpower? Is there any need to? (snipped HTML quote; stick to plaintext please) The situation you described isn't that uncommon in Gentoo. We're a bit smaller than we used to be, but I've also noticed that more people are being brought on than they were when I first started using Gentoo in 2012 and even near the time I was accepted as a developer. Being a recruiter and/or mentor is no small task. You need to be extremely comfortable talking about the nitty gritty of ebuilds and a strong grasp of the PMS would be even better. Absorbing that information takes time, and I wonder if despite the new blood we've been getting, some knowledge isn't being passed down as well as it maybe should be. Given that so much needs to be learned and a lot of trust goes into developers, it's no surprise that we tend to take our time accepting people. That said, I chalk it up to a manpower problem. As far as I know the recruiting and proxy-maint teams are dedicated, but small. They do an awesome job (that I am not cut out for) so they deserve a lot of respect. But it does indeed seem that scheduling and workloads are not in sync. -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:17:58 + "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today > it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one > maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only > concerned about if the other maintainer is also very busy or not > available. > > Some of these packages are very niche, and while they continue to > work, they could use a bit more attention than they get presently > (you might only hear about them when they break and never when they > work). > > They are generally NOT broken and in need of tree-cleaning, but are > just lacking forward momentum (not a few bugs are reasonable upstream > bugs or feature improvements). Many were once shiny and had lots of > people that cared, but that dwindled as they become mundane and just > expected to work. > > General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not > be a bad outcome from this email either ;-). Count me in then. What's the "official" way of joining these days ?
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:32:55 -0400 Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Lars Wendler > wrote: > > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages > > yet, so we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very > > old systems. > > What's the time frame for lifting that restriction? > > There are some key packages that base-system does not maintain, and it > would be good to have a documented guideline for it. > > For example, I maintain the dev-lang/python ebuilds, and I will > probably be jumping to EAPI 6 whenever Python 3.6 is released. If you only update python 3.6, I think eapi6 will be long accepted when that'll be the only available version or even the default :)
Recruiting process (Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care)
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today > it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one > maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only > concerned about if the other maintainer is also very busy or not > available. > > Some of these packages are very niche, and while they continue to work, > they could use a bit more attention than they get presently (you might > only hear about them when they break and never when they work). > > They are generally NOT broken and in need of tree-cleaning, but are just > lacking forward momentum (not a few bugs are reasonable upstream bugs or > feature improvements). Many were once shiny and had lots of people that > cared, but that dwindled as they become mundane and just expected to > work. > > General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not be > a bad outcome from this email either ;-). > This...kinda touches on a side issue. I've been a bit waylaid by RL issues during my quest to become a developer myself, and both of my prospective mentors had to step aside for the same reason before the process could finish. I'm a little slow on the quizzes and some recent changes in gentoo invalidated some of my answers, so part of it is my fault for falling behind. But I was kinda wondering, is there anything that can be done to beef up the manpower? Is there any need to? > > Some of this is from stuff I know needs eyeballs, and others are where > the package seems to have more than a few old bugs open. > > Packages in need of review & tweaks or just more eyeballs > -- > app-admin/sudo (upstream?) > app-admin/sysklogd- (upstream?) > app-shells/bash (upstream?) > dev-util/strace (upstream?) > net-dialup/ppp > net-firewall/iptables > net-fs/nfs-utils (upstream?) > net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) > net-misc/dhcp (upstream?) > net-misc/ntp (upstream?) > net-misc/openssh > net-nds/rpcbind > sys-apps/baselayout > sys-apps/coreutils (upstream?) > sys-apps/kbd (upstream?) > sys-block/aoetools > sys-block/iscsitarget > sys-block/open-iscsi > sys-block/thin-provisioning-tools > sys-block/vblade > sys-fs/lvm2 (mostly in regards to genkernel interaction) > sys-fs/multipath-tools > sys-fs/quota > > -- > Robin Hugh Johnson > Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Trustee & Treasurer > E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org > GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 > GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136 >
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
Am Mittwoch, 24. August 2016, 16:05:05 schrieb Lars Wendler: > > Oh, and to all new team members: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. > That won't help anyone with upgrading. Large parts of Perl are already EAPI=6. Such an old portage will not see these ebuilds and therefore think that 2/3 of all Perl packages have been removed from the tree, with corresponding hilarity. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 08:11:38PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:17:58PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) > > I maintain dhcpcd; I'm not sure why it is on this list. > In fact, there is a stablereq still pending on 6.11.1-r1. > > Upstream is reachable on the #openrc chat channel. The rough criterion I used (included if any were true): - any major bug/improvement known to me - 3 bugs w/ last-change >=1 year - 6 bugs w/ last-change >=6 months - 10 bugs total The "(upstream?)" note was based on a cursory glance of the summary lines. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Trustee & Treasurer E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 04:05:05PM +0200, Lars Wendler wrote: > On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:08:30 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > >On 8/23/16 8:03 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: > >> I have some kind of interest for these packages: > > > >Lars, maybe once we get some names we should get a meeting of > >base-system together and coordinate our efforts. In particular, I > >mostly have interest in those packages that make up @system for the > >stages I build. > > > > Guys, I'd like to take the opportunity to "revive" the #gentoo-base IRC > channel for coordination between base-system developers. > Perhaps "revive" is not the appropriate word considering that the > channel never stopped to exist but rather became extinct. > > Opinions? Sure, I'm fine with using it; I'm there anyway. > Furthermore what about the devs currently being listed in base-system > team but stopped taking care of the team's packages for years? I would say contact them individually and ask them if they want to stay on the team. > Oh, and to all new team members: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. This was always a huge mistery that never really made sense. Once the pm is upgraded on a system to eapi 6, I don't see the reason to hold back any base system packages to older eapis, especially once eapi 6 has been stable for a year. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On 08/24/2016 11:32 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Lars Wendler > wrote: >> Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so >> we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. > > What's the time frame for lifting that restriction? > > There are some key packages that base-system does not maintain, and it > would be good to have a documented guideline for it. > > For example, I maintain the dev-lang/python ebuilds, and I will > probably be jumping to EAPI 6 whenever Python 3.6 is released. > The EAPI=6 upgrade is probably already hosed; there was recently a thread on -user where a guy tried to update after 1.5 years and some dependency required EAPI=6 and his portage couldn't do it. The simple solution appears to be to download a new copy of portage and run it right out of the source tree until your system can do EAPI=6.
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not be > a bad outcome from this email either ;-). I am considering joining, if only to have some input and greater transparency on decision making. For example, I have no idea when the last time a leader for the base-system project was selected. If that has happened recently, please update the project page on the wiki.
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Lars Wendler wrote: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. What's the time frame for lifting that restriction? There are some key packages that base-system does not maintain, and it would be good to have a documented guideline for it. For example, I maintain the dev-lang/python ebuilds, and I will probably be jumping to EAPI 6 whenever Python 3.6 is released.
Upgrading Old Gentoo - Was Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On 24/08/16 15:08, Pacho Ramos wrote: > This reminds me a question I have for some time: is it documented in > some place what are the steps to follow for updating old systems? I > remember posts like: > http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/ > > but I don't know if that is "official" or a workaround or... :/ > > Thanks a lot for the info! > I'll confess I've often resorted back to a stage3, and simply installed packages from /var/lib/portage/world .. or you can be bold and copy it over, and see what breaks. But I am interested in the process you linked .. its just not very accessible without the older snapshots. Dunno whether there is a convenient way to "roll-back" gentoo, besides doing a git checkout of the tree, and progressively working back from a suitable snapshot MJE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:08:30 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote: >On 8/23/16 8:03 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: >> I have some kind of interest for these packages: > >Lars, maybe once we get some names we should get a meeting of >base-system together and coordinate our efforts. In particular, I >mostly have interest in those packages that make up @system for the >stages I build. > Guys, I'd like to take the opportunity to "revive" the #gentoo-base IRC channel for coordination between base-system developers. Perhaps "revive" is not the appropriate word considering that the channel never stopped to exist but rather became extinct. Opinions? Furthermore what about the devs currently being listed in base-system team but stopped taking care of the team's packages for years? Oh, and to all new team members: Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. Kind regards Lars -- Lars Wendler Gentoo package maintainer GPG: 21CC CF02 4586 0A07 ED93 9F68 498F E765 960E 9B39 Attention! New gpg key! See https://www.gentoofan.org/blog/index.php?/archives/9-New-gpg-keys.html pgpt6JCNU2Zft.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
El mié, 24-08-2016 a las 16:05 +0200, Lars Wendler escribió: > [...] > Oh, and to all new team members: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, > so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old > systems. > > > Kind regards > Lars This reminds me a question I have for some time: is it documented in some place what are the steps to follow for updating old systems? I remember posts like: http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/ but I don't know if that is "official" or a workaround or... :/ Thanks a lot for the info!
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:17:58PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today > it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one > maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only > concerned about if the other maintainer is also very busy or not > available. > > Some of these packages are very niche, and while they continue to work, > they could use a bit more attention than they get presently (you might > only hear about them when they break and never when they work). > > They are generally NOT broken and in need of tree-cleaning, but are just > lacking forward momentum (not a few bugs are reasonable upstream bugs or > feature improvements). Many were once shiny and had lots of people that > cared, but that dwindled as they become mundane and just expected to > work. > > General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not be > a bad outcome from this email either ;-). > > Some of this is from stuff I know needs eyeballs, and others are where > the package seems to have more than a few old bugs open. I'll join too. I use a fair few of them and there is SELinux integration in most of the core packages so at the very least i'll help there. -- Jason > > Packages in need of review & tweaks or just more eyeballs > -- > app-admin/sudo (upstream?) > app-admin/sysklogd- (upstream?) > app-shells/bash (upstream?) > dev-util/strace (upstream?) > net-dialup/ppp > net-firewall/iptables > net-fs/nfs-utils (upstream?) > net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) > net-misc/dhcp (upstream?) > net-misc/ntp (upstream?) > net-misc/openssh > net-nds/rpcbind > sys-apps/baselayout > sys-apps/coreutils (upstream?) > sys-apps/kbd (upstream?) > sys-block/aoetools > sys-block/iscsitarget > sys-block/open-iscsi > sys-block/thin-provisioning-tools > sys-block/vblade > sys-fs/lvm2 (mostly in regards to genkernel interaction) > sys-fs/multipath-tools > sys-fs/quota > > -- > Robin Hugh Johnson > Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Trustee & Treasurer > E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org > GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 > GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:17:58 + "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > Some of these packages are very niche, and while they continue to > work, they could use a bit more attention than they get presently > (you might only hear about them when they break and never when they > work). > > They are generally NOT broken and in need of tree-cleaning, but are > just lacking forward momentum (not a few bugs are reasonable upstream > bugs or feature improvements). Many were once shiny and had lots of > people that cared, but that dwindled as they become mundane and just > expected to work. > > General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not > be a bad outcome from this email either ;-). I have some (both day job and personal) interest in keeping most of the packages on that list working and moving forward, and would not be opposed to joining base-system to help out (if you will have me). As it is, I have been helping out with openssh X509 support for awhile now. > > Some of this is from stuff I know needs eyeballs, and others are where > the package seems to have more than a few old bugs open. > > Packages in need of review & tweaks or just more eyeballs > -- > app-admin/sudo (upstream?) > app-admin/sysklogd- (upstream?) > app-shells/bash (upstream?) > dev-util/strace (upstream?) > net-dialup/ppp > net-firewall/iptables > net-fs/nfs-utils (upstream?) > net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) > net-misc/dhcp (upstream?) > net-misc/ntp (upstream?) > net-misc/openssh > net-nds/rpcbind > sys-apps/baselayout > sys-apps/coreutils (upstream?) > sys-apps/kbd (upstream?) > sys-block/aoetools > sys-block/iscsitarget > sys-block/open-iscsi > sys-block/thin-provisioning-tools > sys-block/vblade > sys-fs/lvm2 (mostly in regards to genkernel interaction) > sys-fs/multipath-tools > sys-fs/quota >
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:17:58PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) I maintain dhcpcd; I'm not sure why it is on this list. In fact, there is a stablereq still pending on 6.11.1-r1. Upstream is reachable on the #openrc chat channel. > sys-apps/baselayout I can become a second maintainer for this. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
Hi, "Anthony G. Basile" writes: > maybe once we get some names we should get a meeting of > base-system together and coordinate our efforts. I am interested in keeping the base packages working on Prefix, especially bash and baselayout. Please count me in. Benda
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On 8/23/16 8:03 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: > I have some kind of interest for these packages: Lars, maybe once we get some names we should get a meeting of base-system together and coordinate our efforts. In particular, I mostly have interest in those packages that make up @system for the stages I build. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 23:17:58 + Robin H. Johnson wrote: >Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today >it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one >maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only >concerned about if the other maintainer is also very busy or not >available. > >Some of these packages are very niche, and while they continue to work, >they could use a bit more attention than they get presently (you might >only hear about them when they break and never when they work). > >They are generally NOT broken and in need of tree-cleaning, but are >just lacking forward momentum (not a few bugs are reasonable upstream >bugs or feature improvements). Many were once shiny and had lots of >people that cared, but that dwindled as they become mundane and just >expected to work. > >General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not >be a bad outcome from this email either ;-). > >Some of this is from stuff I know needs eyeballs, and others are where >the package seems to have more than a few old bugs open. > >Packages in need of review & tweaks or just more eyeballs >-- >app-admin/sudo (upstream?) >app-admin/sysklogd- (upstream?) >app-shells/bash (upstream?) >dev-util/strace (upstream?) >net-dialup/ppp >net-firewall/iptables >net-fs/nfs-utils (upstream?) >net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) >net-misc/dhcp (upstream?) >net-misc/ntp (upstream?) >net-misc/openssh >net-nds/rpcbind >sys-apps/baselayout >sys-apps/coreutils (upstream?) >sys-apps/kbd (upstream?) >sys-block/aoetools >sys-block/iscsitarget >sys-block/open-iscsi >sys-block/thin-provisioning-tools >sys-block/vblade >sys-fs/lvm2 (mostly in regards to genkernel interaction) >sys-fs/multipath-tools >sys-fs/quota > I have some kind of interest for these packages: app-admin/sudo app-admin/sysklogd app-shells/bash net-dialup/ppp net-firewall/iptables net-misc/dhcpcd net-misc/dhcp net-misc/ntp net-misc/openssh sys-apps/coreutils sys-apps/kbd But I think I cannot maintain all of them alone. So yeah, fresh (active!) blood in base-system would be nice. Kind regards Lars -- Lars Wendler Gentoo package maintainer GPG: 21CC CF02 4586 0A07 ED93 9F68 498F E765 960E 9B39 Attention! New gpg key! See https://www.gentoofan.org/blog/index.php?/archives/9-New-gpg-keys.html pgpukSXcsG7PA.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP
Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care
On 8/23/16 7:17 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today I've been doing some base-system related stuff because of uclibc/-ng and musl on minor arches, building stage3's for those. My involvement has been marginal because my emphasis is not mainstream, but I can start giving some of those packages love. I'm spread a bit thin, but I'm going to give away some of my less important packages. -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
