Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Wednesday 25 February 2009 07:43:42 Dale wrote: Ooops, you didn't send them to the list. Since you didn't change the subject line, it put it in the same folder as gentoo-user stuff. I didn't even notice. My bad. I filter mailing lists by subject since it starts the same way in the subject line. You know, gentoo-user, gentoo-dev etc etc. I need to open my eyes. Tell me about it :-) I've just spent 30 minutes starting at my Konsole trying to figure out why I can't send from my own relays if I telnet: MAIL FROM: al...@domain 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax A colleague took one look and said I think you are missing a and a in there Sheesh. That's a cake offense. Now I gotta find a bakery. Well, I haven't slept but a few hours in the past several days. I hate psoriasis. It itches, a lot. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 23:43:42 -0600, Dale wrote: I filter mailing lists by subject since it starts the same way in the subject line. You know, gentoo-user, gentoo-dev etc etc. I need to open my eyes. You need to filter on list headers, that way off-list replies won't appear to be on-list :) -- Neil Bothwick Bookmark - A means of returning to where you got lost last time. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 23:43:42 -0600, Dale wrote: I filter mailing lists by subject since it starts the same way in the subject line. You know, gentoo-user, gentoo-dev etc etc. I need to open my eyes. You need to filter on list headers, that way off-list replies won't appear to be on-list :) I'm not sure Seamonkey has that option. At least my eyes haven't seen it yet. -_o Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:28:41 -0600 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not sure Seamonkey has that option. At least my eyes haven't seen it yet. -_o AFAIK seamonkey uses mbox format to store messages, so you can probably instruct it to pass them to some external mail delivery agent (like procmail), which have all the necessary filtering features. Well, provided you have any need for that features, of course :) -- Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:28:41 -0600, Dale wrote: You need to filter on list headers, that way off-list replies won't appear to be on-list :) I'm not sure Seamonkey has that option. At least my eyes haven't seen it yet. -_o It can't filter on mail headers? I though only Gmail was that lame :( I'd be surprised if is can't as Thunderbird can. -- Neil Bothwick Bother, said Pooh, as someone flamed him for no reason. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On 16:10 Wed 25 Feb , Neil Bothwick wrote: On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:28:41 -0600, Dale wrote: You need to filter on list headers, that way off-list replies won't appear to be on-list :) I'm not sure Seamonkey has that option. At least my eyes haven't seen it yet. -_o It can't filter on mail headers? I though only Gmail was that lame :( Gmail can filter message's based on header. Use the Has the words: option while filtering. For Gentoo-User, Has the words: list:gentoo-user.gentoo.org I think Seamonkey should have similar option, I know thunderbird has it. Regards, Masood Ahmed -- Quick!! Act as if nothing has happened! pgpqw8TtTkngz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:54:17 +0530, Masood Ahmed wrote: Gmail can filter message's based on header. Use the Has the words: option while filtering. For Gentoo-User, Has the words: list:gentoo-user.gentoo.org Interesting, I though that only applied to the message body, thanks. It still won't make me like GMail, but I have to use it for push mail with my phone. -- Neil Bothwick Earlier, I didn't have time to finish anything. This time I w signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Masood Ahmed wrote: On 16:10 Wed 25 Feb , Neil Bothwick wrote: On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:28:41 -0600, Dale wrote: You need to filter on list headers, that way off-list replies won't appear to be on-list :) I'm not sure Seamonkey has that option. At least my eyes haven't seen it yet. -_o It can't filter on mail headers? I though only Gmail was that lame :( Gmail can filter message's based on header. Use the Has the words: option while filtering. For Gentoo-User, Has the words: list:gentoo-user.gentoo.org I think Seamonkey should have similar option, I know thunderbird has it. Regards, Masood Ahmed I don't see that option tho. It may be there but I can't find it. Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes: As to why there isn't such a thing with portage, I don't know. You would have to ask the kde ebuild maintainers. But if you would like to have this collection of sets and haven't added the overlay, I'd happily send you a tarball of all the kde sets. OK email them to me. thx, James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
James wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes: As to why there isn't such a thing with portage, I don't know. You would have to ask the kde ebuild maintainers. But if you would like to have this collection of sets and haven't added the overlay, I'd happily send you a tarball of all the kde sets. OK email them to me. thx, James He emailed a copy to the list so you should be able to get them. I already got mine. It is one reply above this one I think. It is in my mail box anyway. It's a attachment. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Tuesday 24 February 2009 23:30:04 Dale wrote: James wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes: As to why there isn't such a thing with portage, I don't know. You would have to ask the kde ebuild maintainers. But if you would like to have this collection of sets and haven't added the overlay, I'd happily send you a tarball of all the kde sets. OK email them to me. thx, James He emailed a copy to the list I did? Oh dear. Meant to send them direct to Dale and James. Sorry for the noise. so you should be able to get them. I already got mine. It is one reply above this one I think. It is in my mail box anyway. It's a attachment. Dale :-) :-) -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 24 February 2009 23:30:04 Dale wrote: James wrote: Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon at gmail.com writes: As to why there isn't such a thing with portage, I don't know. You would have to ask the kde ebuild maintainers. But if you would like to have this collection of sets and haven't added the overlay, I'd happily send you a tarball of all the kde sets. OK email them to me. thx, James He emailed a copy to the list I did? Oh dear. Meant to send them direct to Dale and James. Sorry for the noise. so you should be able to get them. I already got mine. It is one reply above this one I think. It is in my mail box anyway. It's a attachment. Dale :-) :-) Ooops, you didn't send them to the list. Since you didn't change the subject line, it put it in the same folder as gentoo-user stuff. I didn't even notice. My bad. I filter mailing lists by subject since it starts the same way in the subject line. You know, gentoo-user, gentoo-dev etc etc. I need to open my eyes. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Wednesday 25 February 2009 07:43:42 Dale wrote: Ooops, you didn't send them to the list. Since you didn't change the subject line, it put it in the same folder as gentoo-user stuff. I didn't even notice. My bad. I filter mailing lists by subject since it starts the same way in the subject line. You know, gentoo-user, gentoo-dev etc etc. I need to open my eyes. Tell me about it :-) I've just spent 30 minutes starting at my Konsole trying to figure out why I can't send from my own relays if I telnet: MAIL FROM: al...@domain 501 5.1.7 Bad sender address syntax A colleague took one look and said I think you are missing a and a in there Sheesh. That's a cake offense. Now I gotta find a bakery. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
[gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Neil Bothwick neil at digimed.co.uk writes: Sets are a replacement for meta-packages, so your set would contain the packages you need. If it did contain kde-meta, then it would install all of KDE, because that is a dependency of kde-meta. OK, color me dense, but, if we are assuming there should be a smooth (easy) transition from kde-meta to kde sets I'm missing something. The posted lists (sets) do not look anything like the way kde-meta is organized. Call it herd mentality, but I bet many of the current kde-meta crowd would just love to have these sets defined for us and we can choose which of these generic sets we want, and then just build a set or 2 of our own. Then make a file that lists those and all we have to do is emerge that file. Poof done, kde-meta, simple fast and mostly like what other have, using gentoo defined sets for kde-4.2.x Should we not have some standard, logical listing of of the various kde packages, like the current categories for kde 3.5.x, only in set form? Sure folks could build there own sets but if all you want is the old kde-meta (give or take a few application), in sets+kde.4.2.x form, there should be some predefined sets for us? That is to say, (more clearly I hope); when I go to the kde button in 3.5.9, I get these categories: Development Entertainment Games Graphics snip So what aren't there pre-defined sets with this sort of grouping? Thus the new kde-4.2.x would be a straight convert (except for applications that are lost and/or gained) to ease the transition to kde 4.2.x using sets. Really, all I want is a similar setup to kde-meta, via sets Kde 4.2.x, without having to get intimate with 200+ applications. and not having to define my own sets. Is this already done? Looking at the previous links and Neils postings, at first glance it tells me I'm going to have to spend days learning about what all of these individual packages do to have a somewhat similar setup that kde-meta provided. I do not what to learn the details and names of all of that stuff. I want to emerge a small number of sets and POOF as close as I can get (with sets and kde4.2) to the ole kde-meta? Am I being unreasonable? Did I miss something? (and yes, I'm lazy, mentally crippled, and slow that's why I still do admin work) James
[gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James wrote: OK, color me dense, but, if we are assuming there should be a smooth (easy) transition from kde-meta to kde sets I'm missing something. The posted lists (sets) do not look anything like the way kde-meta is organized. Call it herd mentality, but I bet many of the current kde-meta crowd would just love to have these sets defined for us and we can choose which of these generic sets we want, and then just build a set or 2 of our own. Then make a file that lists those and all we have to do is emerge that file. Poof done, kde-meta, simple fast and mostly like what other have, using gentoo defined sets for kde-4.2.x Should we not have some standard, logical listing of of the various kde packages, like the current categories for kde 3.5.x, only in set form? Sure folks could build there own sets but if all you want is the old kde-meta (give or take a few application), in sets+kde.4.2.x form, there should be some predefined sets for us? That is to say, (more clearly I hope); when I go to the kde button in 3.5.9, I get these categories: Development Entertainment Games Graphics snip So what aren't there pre-defined sets with this sort of grouping? Thus the new kde-4.2.x would be a straight convert (except for applications that are lost and/or gained) to ease the transition to kde 4.2.x using sets. Really, all I want is a similar setup to kde-meta, via sets Kde 4.2.x, without having to get intimate with 200+ applications. and not having to define my own sets. Is this already done? Looking at the previous links and Neils postings, at first glance it tells me I'm going to have to spend days learning about what all of these individual packages do to have a somewhat similar setup that kde-meta provided. I do not what to learn the details and names of all of that stuff. I want to emerge a small number of sets and POOF as close as I can get (with sets and kde4.2) to the ole kde-meta? Am I being unreasonable? Did I miss something? (and yes, I'm lazy, mentally crippled, and slow that's why I still do admin work) There are predefined sets in the kde-testing overlay, that correspond to the upstream tarballs (and, therefore, to the kdefoo-meta packages). Unfortunately, they cannot yet be distributed with the gentoo-x86 tree (that's $PORTDIR, or /usr/portage, for you playing along at home). I don't remember the reasons given for that, but you can copy the sets from that tree, and place them in your /etc/portage/sets/ directory, and modify them at will - or create your own based on those sets. Note that you do not actually need that overlay installed to use the sets; all you have to do is copy the sets from the overlay into your local configuration. - -- ABCD -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkmjbNwACgkQOypDUo0oQOof/gCfTwgO/neVBxe7/YhHN0KpHczz 634Anisv8fvHCS4D26R+Wf3c+Ia5HZ6e =AHxk -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
On Tuesday 24 February 2009 05:33:40 James wrote: Neil Bothwick neil at digimed.co.uk writes: Sets are a replacement for meta-packages, so your set would contain the packages you need. If it did contain kde-meta, then it would install all of KDE, because that is a dependency of kde-meta. OK, color me dense, but, if we are assuming there should be a smooth (easy) transition from kde-meta to kde sets I'm missing something. The posted lists (sets) do not look anything like the way kde-meta is organized. The kde-testing overlay ships with at least 50 pre-defined sets, and in there you will find a set that maps to every -meta ebuild that we have been using for so long. As to why there isn't such a thing with portage, I don't know. You would have to ask the kde ebuild maintainers. But if you would like to have this collection of sets and haven't added the overlay, I'd happily send you a tarball of all the kde sets. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
ABCD en.a...@gmail.com writes: Unfortunately, they cannot yet be distributed with the gentoo-x86 tree (that's $PORTDIR, or /usr/portage, for you playing along at home). I don't remember the reasons given for that, I think that it is because the versions of portage (2.2_rcx) which support sets are still masked.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Portage and sets
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Tuesday 24 February 2009 05:33:40 James wrote: Neil Bothwick neil at digimed.co.uk writes: Sets are a replacement for meta-packages, so your set would contain the packages you need. If it did contain kde-meta, then it would install all of KDE, because that is a dependency of kde-meta. OK, color me dense, but, if we are assuming there should be a smooth (easy) transition from kde-meta to kde sets I'm missing something. The posted lists (sets) do not look anything like the way kde-meta is organized. The kde-testing overlay ships with at least 50 pre-defined sets, and in there you will find a set that maps to every -meta ebuild that we have been using for so long. As to why there isn't such a thing with portage, I don't know. You would have to ask the kde ebuild maintainers. But if you would like to have this collection of sets and haven't added the overlay, I'd happily send you a tarball of all the kde sets. If it's not huge or anything, I'll take a look at it. Dial-up remember? Life sucks out here in the sticks. It's quiet out here tho. Oh, off list of course. Dale :-) :-)
