Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 02:50:43AM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
Two things I'm always wondering about when this topic comes up:
- is there really a need for USE=client? In most cases people request
to exclude the server part, can't remember ever seeing a request to
exclude
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 02:50:43AM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Two things I'm always wondering about when this topic comes up:
> - is there really a need for USE=client? In most cases people request
> to exclude the server part, can't remember ever seeing a request to
> exclude the client.
I can't
On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 14:10:58 -0800
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - USE=server/client/minimal poses problem when it comes to dealing
> with dependencies that require the server or the client. The best
> that is doable with the present portage is checking that the app is
> compiled
the OSU guys helped me finish getting my lantank online ... this is a SuperH
machine that i've made available for anyone interested in testing on that
architecture ... thanks to OSU for the bandwidth and for jstubbs to take the
time to mail me some from japan ;)
more details can be found here:
On Monday 27 November 2006 11:42, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Might want to reread bug 152593 in detail, summary being "legal issues".
no one in there is qualified to give any sort of legal opinion and/or advice
if you want a real answer, talk to the pro-bono lawyers that are helping out
the Foundatio
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:53:43 -0500
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 27 November 2006 10:48, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Sunday 26 November 2006 18:38, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 05:42:31PM +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:53:43 -0500
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Monday 27 November 2006 10:48, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On Sunday 26 November 2006 18:38, Mariu
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:53:43 -0500
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 27 November 2006 10:48, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Sunday 26 November 2006 18:38, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
Steve Long wrote:
Hi,
There was a discussion a few weeks back about stopping system b0rkage; a
possible sol'n had been previously discussed on the fora, ie having the
tree in svn for easier branching. I understand from the recent ANNOUNCE by
Robin Johnson that svn access is now available, as w
On Monday 27 November 2006 10:48, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sunday 26 November 2006 18:38, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > is there a way in the new GLEP to say "never bother me with any
> > > > license bullcra
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 18:52:19 -0500
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 18:38, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > is there a way in the new GLEP to say "never bother me with any
> > > license bullcrap" ? i made sure the curren
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 11:33:58 +
Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In any event, what I'd like to raise is the issue of having a
> > (semi-)official version of gentoo that lags behind the cutting-edge
> > distro for stability. Is this feasible?
> >
> > Apologies if this is already being
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 13:02:17 +
"Stuart Herbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/27/06, paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You can't take workload out of the picture since it's the main issue
> > here. Stable tree means backport fixes and I don't see this
> > happening as it can't be automa
On 11/27/06, paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You can't take workload out of the picture since it's the main issue
here. Stable tree means backport fixes and I don't see this happening as
it can't be automated:
"Stable tree means backport fixes" is an assumption, not a requirement.
It's one rea
Steve Long schrieb:
>> In any event, what I'd like to raise is the issue of having a
>> (semi-)official version of gentoo that lags behind the cutting-edge distro
>> for stability. Is this feasible?
>>
>> Apologies if this is already being discussed elsewhere.
>>
> I appreciate that there is GLEP 1
> In any event, what I'd like to raise is the issue of having a
> (semi-)official version of gentoo that lags behind the cutting-edge distro
> for stability. Is this feasible?
>
> Apologies if this is already being discussed elsewhere.
>
I appreciate that there is GLEP 19 according to earlier dis
Hi,
There was a discussion a few weeks back about stopping system b0rkage; a
possible sol'n had been previously discussed on the fora, ie having the
tree in svn for easier branching. I understand from the recent ANNOUNCE by
Robin Johnson that svn access is now available, as well as anonymous CVS
Oioi users and developers!
This is your monthly bugday reminder that the next bugday is going to held on
Saturday the 2. December.
Come by in #Gentoo-bugs and help out fixing some our bugs.
If you have any questions, feel free to email me or contact me on IRC
(eroyf).
Regards,
Alexander H. Færø
18 matches
Mail list logo
