After a long marathon of requests and quizzes, runner 972 has just crossed
the finish. We had an exclusive interview with Michael Curtis Napier who
likes to call himself curtis119 because his first 118 egos all failed
miserably.
Michael is an old rot in the ICT business (yo! guys! we have a nerd
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 00:36, Sven Wegener wrote:
Hi all!
Please see below for a list of use.desc and use.local.desc entries that
are currently unused. I also include a list of local flags for which a
global flag with the same name exists.
Local flags that are also global flags:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/06/2005 01:55 PM, Alin Dobre wrote:
You juuust couldn't stand your yahoo address and thought to sign in for
a free gentoo address, didn't you? :)
One big welcome, Curtis!
Yeah!!! Good point Alin :) And now through his evil schemes, he has
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 01:26, Mike Frysinger wrote:
personally i'd support a doxinetd func that would check to see if xinetd is
installed rather than go with a USE flag ...
As Donnie also said, automagical stuff is not so good.
One can want the xinetd file for cvs but not svn for example.
--
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:25:32AM +0300, Alin Dobre wrote:
You juuust couldn't stand your yahoo address and thought to sign in for
a free gentoo address, didn't you? :)
One big welcome, Curtis!
Now everyone using yahoo will start asking Anyone got a spare
G(entoo)-mail invite? ;-)
Congrats
I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this yet, but the software
patent vote from the EU is in. 684 in favor of rejecting, 14 not in
favor of rejecting, and 18 abstaining.
Mike Tindal
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 05:30 -0500, Michael Tindal wrote:
I'm not sure if anyone has commented on this yet, but the software
patent vote from the EU is in. 684 in favor of rejecting, 14 not in
favor of rejecting, and 18 abstaining.
Mike Tindal
Reading mono's internals makes me dyslexic.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Wegener wrote:
I want developers to take a look at the list and see if packages they
maintain are listed. I'm aware that the list is quite large and still
contains a lot of false positives. I can whitelist packages for DEPEND
or RDEPEND
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:34:20PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
personally i'd support a doxinetd func that would check to see if xinetd is
installed rather than go with a USE flag ...
This kind of auto-enabling stuff is our bane upstream, so I don't see
that creating
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 06:19:01PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 02:00:24AM +0200, Sven Wegener wrote:
[snip]
Could you possibly split the stuff into two files?
one for RDEPEND.only and one for DEPEND.only?
http://dev.gentoo.org/~swegener/qa/depend-mismatches-DEPEND
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ladies/Gents,
Allow me to introduce the newest addition to our team. Her name is Kathryn
Kulick aka GothGirl. She's from New Orleans, Louisiana, but is currently
living in Baton Rouge. She is a mother of 3 children. With her addition,
there is
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 04:05 am, Jakub Moc wrote:
6.7.2005, 0:36:40, Sven Wegener wrote:
sys-apps/module-init-tools: no-old-linux
ChangeLog:
snip
12 Jan 2005; Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
module-init-tools-3.0-r2.ebuild, module-init-tools-3.1.ebuild:
Remove
Vapier wrote: [Tue Jul 05 2005, 07:26:26PM EDT]
so what we should do?
Add a global xinetd useflag and a doxinetd function to add/remove the
installed config files?
Yeah i know they aren't so big.. but the less, the best.
personally i'd support a doxinetd func that would check to see
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 15:36, Aron Griffis wrote:
Diego: what is the content of doxinetd?
Right now? It doesn't exists.
It was an idea. I think something like:
doxinetd() {
if ! hasq xinetd ${IUSE} || use xinetd;
insinto /etc/xinetd.d #or whatever the dir is, not sure
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 16:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
the hasq part is pointless and the insinto is bad form for a do* func
It's not pointless, ignoring it will make us come back to the old problem of
dopamd/newpamd functions which couldn't be used on non-optional-pam-dependant
packages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2005-07-05 20:00:24 -0400 Sven Wegener [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Short explanation for the subject: A *DEPEND mismatch is when a
package
is listed in DEPEND, but missing in RDEPEND and vice versa. I have a
list of ebuilds at
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 10:32 am, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 16:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
the hasq part is pointless and the insinto is bad form for a do* func
It's not pointless, ignoring it will make us come back to the old problem
of dopamd/newpamd
Aaron Walker wrote: [Wed Jul 06 2005, 08:46:23AM EDT]
Allow me to introduce the newest addition to our team. Her name is
Kathryn Kulick aka GothGirl. She's from New Orleans, Louisiana, but
is currently living in Baton Rouge. She is a mother of 3 children.
With her addition, there is now
snip
Who is the other husband/wife developer team?
Well before she left and he went MIA there was Eric and Aida Sammer...
Regards,
Aron
--
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Are we forbidden from DEPEND=RDEPEND...? I only ask because 90% of the
dev-perl portions would fall into that category - if it's an rdepend, it can
be a depend as well (technically you can build without most of the underlying
rdepends, but you will get warnings from perl that prereqs weren't
On 7/5/05, Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to introduce the following security policy for web-based apps.
Why only web-based apps? What about other tools and apps exposed to the network?
--
radoslaw.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 09:36:54AM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
No, the USE flag is the right way.
If we do it for xinetd files, we should also do it for logrotate files.
Right now there are 4 packages that have logrotate as a local USE flag,
but I know for a fact there are more that can use it
Maurice van der Pot wrote: [Wed Jul 06 2005, 02:20:15PM EDT]
If we do it for xinetd files, we should also do it for logrotate files.
Agreed.
FWIW, I'd like to see xinetd and logrotate in default USE for the
profiles since otherwise it would be a pain to go through and remerge
things after
Azarah wrote: [Tue Jul 05 2005, 09:39:20PM EDT]
As far as I know many of these are still in use .. Aron ?
Some were, some weren't. All the moz stuff is fixed up now.
Regards,
Aron
--
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer
pgpnWQYgeUOxd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
My congratulations Curtis! You deserve it :)
Now I can share this editor with Swift :greens:
On 7/6/05, Haas Wernfried [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Congrats Curtis!
Wernfried
--
Ioannis Aslanidis
deathwing00[at]gentoo.org 0xB9B11F4E
deathwing00[at]forums.gentoo.org 0xC2539DA3
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:06:04AM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
This has absolutely zero to do with udev, but the point is that devfs vs
udev flames cannot be ignored until non udev supported kernels from
all arches are removed from the tree.
It also has nothing to do with the naming scheme we
Hi all!
OK, subject isn't fully the truth. Portage doesn't set RDEPEND=DEPEND
for eclasses. So, please check your eclasses and if they only set DEPEND
and you need the RDEPEND=DEPEND thing, go ahead and add it to the
eclass!
For the ebuild part the plan is to remove the automatic RDEPEND=DEPEND
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:04, Sven Wegener wrote:
We would like to split up src_compile. The
new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should
do the emake part.
That will be very very interesting but... but not everything uses ./configure,
so we should add a bunch of
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 07:06 pm, Roy Marples wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's
time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently
are living with[2].
[2] devfs vs.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Wegener wrote:
Hi all!
I'm writing this mail to bring you a thought we had over on freenode in
the #gentoo-portage channel. We would like to split up src_compile. The
new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:27 pm, Jonathan Smith wrote:
you could simply make the default:
src_configure() {
[ -f ./configure ] econf || die
}
well you cant because then die would be called if ./configure isnt a file but
i think that's irrelevant to the point you're trying to make
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:27, Jonathan Smith wrote:
src_configure() {
[ -f ./configure ] econf || die
}
I'm not still convinced about this.
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò
Gentoo Developer - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
(Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64, Sound, PAM)
Jonathan Smith wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:04, Sven Wegener wrote:
We would like to split up src_compile. The
new src_configure should just do the econf part and src_compile should
do the emake
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:41:43PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:20 pm, Sven Wegener wrote:
We would like to introduce a new ebuild variable named EBUILD_FORMAT,
seems like the name is much longer than it needs to be ... what's wrong with
say 'EVER' ?
It's fine
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Wegener wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:41:43PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:20 pm, Sven Wegener wrote:
We would like to introduce a new ebuild variable named EBUILD_FORMAT,
seems like the name is much longer
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 03:09 +0200, Sven Wegener wrote:
And EVER automatically was E-VER for me, never had the idea to read it
as ever. Does that count as being addicted to Gentoo?
Yes it does
--
Olivier Crête
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x86 Security Liaison
signature.asc
Description: This is a
Sven Wegener wrote:
And EVER automatically was E-VER for me, never had the idea to read it
as ever. Does that count as being addicted to Gentoo?
Sven
Under the influence at the very least...
--
Joshua Baergen
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 02:04:04 +0200
Sven Wegener [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We would like to split up src_compile. The new src_configure
should just do the econf part and src_compile should do the
emake part.
Just by curiosity, i've run a grep on the tree to count occurences
of ^[[:space:]]*econf
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
That will be very very interesting but... but not everything uses ./configure,
so we should add a bunch of dummy src_configure, and a call to econf || die
for those packages not fixed to use that will return a bunch of erroneous
packages not compiling.
I
On Jul 6, 2005, at 8:01 PM, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Wegener wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:41:43PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:20 pm, Sven Wegener wrote:
We would like to introduce a new ebuild variable
On Thursday 07 July 2005 12:36 am, Kito wrote:
On Jul 6, 2005, at 8:01 PM, Nathan L. Adams wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sven Wegener wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 08:41:43PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 06 July 2005 08:20 pm, Sven Wegener wrote:
41 matches
Mail list logo
