Jason Huebel wrote:
It's with pleasure that I announce a new developer: Dang. Dang has been
working as an Arch Tester for AMD64 for a while now and has proven himself
to be an asset to the team. So we felt it would be good to officially make
him a developer. He'll be helping with amd64 bug
Hi,
ok another problem for Gentoo/FreeBSD project :P
Currently there are a few places where, to fix permissions of files, the
ebuilds does a chown -R root:root ${D} or something similar.
Unfortunately such a command is invalid on G/FBSD because there's no root
group, instead wheel group has
On Sunday 22 May 2005 04:35 am, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I'd like to move the Unofficial Gentoo Development Guide [1] onto my
devspace [2]. This could be construed as weakening its unofficial status
(despite the title and the footers), so I'm asking for comments first
rather than simply doing
On Sun, 22 May 2005 10:49:39 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| So I was wondering for a solution for this problem: we have a
| $USERLAND variable which can be used to select the way the chown must
| be done, if chown root:root or chown root:wheel; I think both BSD and
|
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Hi,
ok another problem for Gentoo/FreeBSD project :P
Currently there are a few places where, to fix permissions of files, the
ebuilds does a chown -R root:root ${D} or something similar.
Unfortunately such a command is invalid on G/FBSD because there's no
On Sunday 22 May 2005 11:06, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
get_root_group() {
That should do, so in ebuilds chown -R root;$(get_root_group) blablah.
For me is ok for G/FBSD.
Now, if someone from G/OSX or G/Darwin can tell me how they manage that, we
can be happy for all /alt archs :P
--
Diego
On Sunday 22 May 2005 05:06 am, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
get_root_group() {
sounds like a lot of crap when i'm willing to bet most of these chowns
probably dont need to specify the group at all ...
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Are we allowed to make aw dang jokes now? Oh, wait, I see someone already has.
My job here is done.
Welcome aboard :)
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:57:30AM -0500, Jason Huebel wrote:
It's with pleasure that I announce a new developer: Dang. Dang has been
working as an Arch Tester for AMD64 for
On Sun, 22 May 2005 08:04:38 -0400 Michael Cummings
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Are we allowed to make aw dang jokes now?
No.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
Ey peeps,
Can someone please take a look at the bacula ebuilds, they really do
suck and have several open bugs.
Quite how any of them are marked stable I dunno.
They could use a new maintainer, seems zul is now inactive.
Cheers,
Rob
--
rob holland - [ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] - Gentoo Audit Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
| Hi,
| ok another problem for Gentoo/FreeBSD project :P
| Currently there are a few places where, to fix permissions of files, the
| ebuilds does a chown -R root:root ${D} or something similar.
| Unfortunately such a
On Sunday 22 May 2005 16:38, Alec Warner wrote:
Yeah, this means get working on GLEP 27 *cracks whip*.
Don't think it's related.
That's related to new accounts/group added.
The problem we have is with the base accounts/groups present in the system
itself.
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò
Gentoo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On May 22, 2005, at 4:20 AM, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Sunday 22 May 2005 11:06, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
get_root_group() {
That should do, so in ebuilds chown -R root;$(get_root_group)
blablah.
For me is ok for G/FBSD.
Now, if
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 09:59 -0500, Homer Parker wrote:
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 00:57 -0500, Jason Huebel wrote:
It's with pleasure that I announce a new developer: Dang. Dang has been
working as an Arch Tester for AMD64 for a while now and has proven
himself
to be an asset to the team.
On Sat, 21 May 2005 17:37:53 -0700
Drake Wyrm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I always thought that they were to keep 'emerge unmerge' from removing
an empty directory, but I could be wrong...
That, and to keep portage from removing empty directories during the
post-merge clean phase. Were it
Hi
Xorg 6.8.99.5 really works good.
I've see that 6.8.99.7 have been released in CVS. Did you make some test ?
[ Also, I've made some ebuilds dor XCB, if you are interested :
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93582 ]
See Ya
Beber,
On 4/19/05, Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrej Kacian wrote:
On Sat, 21 May 2005 17:37:53 -0700
Drake Wyrm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I always thought that they were to keep 'emerge unmerge' from removing
an empty directory, but I could be wrong...
That, and to keep portage from removing empty directories during the
post-merge
Hi,
I don't really see why USE=svga is enabled by default. This brings svgalib
into emerge system. svgalib is quite problematic and not used much anymore.
Any objections to dropping it from the default USE flags?
Thanks,
Daniel
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Beber [Gentoo] wrote:
Xorg 6.8.99.5 really works good.
I've see that 6.8.99.7 have been released in CVS. Did you make some test ?
No, not yet. But bumping them is pretty trivial and low priority. I do
it when I get around to it.
[ Also, I've made
19 matches
Mail list logo
