Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
David Leverton wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 01:23:33 Chris Gianelloni wrote: Considering that the most recent official release is 2008.0_beta2, I don't see where you have a point, at all. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/#doc_chap5 The latest release of Gentoo Linux is: Gentoo Linux

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:22 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: David Leverton wrote: On Friday 13 June 2008 11:10:46 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: Interesting to note, however, that Paludis doesn't accept inline comments, and this behaviour predates PMS. There's a reason for Paludis

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
David Leverton wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 04:09:26 George Prowse wrote: In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda Lies and FUD. No maybe it would be best for all if paludis and it's developers were to concentrate on making paludis for a different distro.

[gentoo-dev] -bash: no job control in this shell

2008-06-19 Thread vinod kumar
Hi, I am geting this error when I login to my gentoo uml it becomes very difficult to stop any service. I am able to ssh into this uml from the host without any errors. Any idea how to turn the job control back on...? I have googled for couple of days in vain. please help me .. Vinod

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
Alexis Ballier wrote: On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:18:19 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: libogg and popt are now masked, and they'll wait a bit before return to ~arch that way. 2 months later, any news on this ? I've been using the unmasked versions so long; are we going

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 8:39 AM, George Prowse wrote: ++ It's about time someone said this and I honestly think that lots of developers will be thinking the same. ++ I'm not a developer, but I'm a Gentoo Summer of Code student[0] so maybe my

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 08:41:34 Luca Barbato wrote: The point is to avoid breaking Portage versions that users might reasonably be using, even if only briefly. Do you really expect /all/ users doing a new installation to choose the scary beta instead of the nice safe release? What

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 08:44:41 Luca Barbato wrote: Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:22 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: Care to share the logic and wise reasoning ? [ ${IDEA_ORIGIN} != Ciaran ] die I tend to agree. The reason has already been explained multiple times,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 08:46:02 Luca Barbato wrote: David Leverton wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 04:09:26 George Prowse wrote: In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda Lies and FUD. No Yes. ...are you issuing a press release for exherbo? What the hell

[gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Duncan
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:43:12 -0700: Quite frankly, I'd prefer see Gentoo take control over the specification that defines the most important single feature of Gentoo and remove the non-Gentoo developers from its

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 08:51:15 Luca Barbato wrote: We could either pick a week and do a major ebuild update to remove .la files when unnecessary or just append a notice about revdep rebuild. How do you decide when they're unnecessary? -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
David Leverton wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 08:51:15 Luca Barbato wrote: We could either pick a week and do a major ebuild update to remove .la files when unnecessary or just append a notice about revdep rebuild. How do you decide when they're unnecessary? .la are used for : 1 getting

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 10:36:12 Luca Barbato wrote: 1 getting static libraries (pkg-config replaces this use) Not for library consumers that use libtool but not pkgconfig. 2 load plugins using libtool support Why only plugins? What's to stop an application from loading a normal library

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
David Leverton wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 10:36:12 Luca Barbato wrote: 1 getting static libraries (pkg-config replaces this use) Not for library consumers that use libtool but not pkgconfig. 2 load plugins using libtool support Why only plugins? What's to stop an application from

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 11:39:44 Luca Barbato wrote: Corner cases as usual... What's that supposed to mean? -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Roy Marples
On Thursday 19 June 2008 02:43:12 Chris Gianelloni wrote: Nope. What I see as a problem is that the primary author and current de facto maintainer is so much of an asshole that he was forcibly removed from the Gentoo project, which PMS is supposed to be written for, and has ostracized (at

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Rémi Cardona
David Leverton a écrit : Not for library consumers that use libtool but not pkgconfig. I'd be in favor of having a _default_ configuration for Gentoo where static binaries are never built except for some key packages (mainly for rescue situations). That way, in a dynamic-lib only system,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 13:08:09 Rémi Cardona wrote: David Leverton a écrit : Not for library consumers that use libtool but not pkgconfig. I'd be in favor of having a _default_ configuration for Gentoo where static binaries are never built except for some key packages (mainly for rescue

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Patrick Börjesson
On 2008-06-19 04:09, George Prowse uttered these thoughts: In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda and force it on both the developers and the users so maybe it would be best for all if paludis and it's developers were to concentrate on making paludis for a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Patrick Börjesson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-06-19 04:09, George Prowse uttered these thoughts: In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda and force it on both the developers and the users so maybe it would be best for all if

Re: [gentoo-dev] -bash: no job control in this shell

2008-06-19 Thread Patrick Börjesson
On 2008-06-19 00:46, vinod kumar uttered these thoughts: I am geting this error when I login to my gentoo uml it becomes very difficult to stop any service. I am able to ssh into this uml from the host without any errors. Any idea how to turn the job control back on...? I have googled for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:02:13 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: The point is that their replies to the mailing list waste a lot of time and energy since people will *always* reply to them. Replies? On a mailing list? Whatever is the world coming to? I completely agree. They should stop pushing it

Re: [gentoo-dev] extending existing EAPI semantics

2008-06-19 Thread Peter Volkov
В Втр, 10/06/2008 в 21:10 -0700, Brian Harring пишет: So... someone other then ciaran have a comment? From ebuild developer point of view there is no difference if eapi is a variable of a function call. If changing eapi to a function call makes sourcing of ebuilds more sane, then it's good to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:40 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:02:13 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: The point is that their replies to the mailing list waste a lot of time and energy since people will *always* reply to them. Replies? On a mailing list?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Richard Brown
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 14:19, Nirbheek Chauhan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:40 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:02:13 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: The point is that their replies to the mailing list waste a lot of time and energy since

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:19:32 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:40 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:02:13 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: The point is that their replies to the mailing list waste a lot of time and energy since people will

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:56 PM, David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:19:32 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:40 PM, David Leverton On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:02:13 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: The point is that their replies to the mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] GLEP Purpose and Guidelines

2008-06-19 Thread Peter Volkov
В Втр, 17/06/2008 в 09:48 +0200, Tiziano Müller пишет: http://dev.gentoo.org/~dev-zero/glep/glep-glep.txt Your GLEP describes only two possible types: Technical and Organizational. At the same time type of your GLEP is informational. How this could be? What happens with informational GLEPs?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Arun Raghavan
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Richard Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot This is the second time in 8 days that you are doing this. Please stop filling our inboxes with this puerile trolling. Devrel team: I do appreciate that the Gentoo Way has been to keep the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:52:01 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: oh noes, too many posts with the same 3 people replying everywhere and spreading their minority irrelevant opinion as though it really mattered! What a gargantuan waste of time and energy11!~ If you disagree with people's opinions,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Olivier Crête
On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 14:08 +0200, Rémi Cardona wrote: Why only plugins? What's to stop an application from loading a normal library using libtool's dlopen wrapper (perhaps so it can fail gracefully if the library is missing, for example)? Nothing per se, but I have yet to see any

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] GLEP Purpose and Guidelines

2008-06-19 Thread Tiziano Müller
Peter Volkov wrote: ? ???, 17/06/2008 ? 09:48 +0200, Tiziano Müller ?: http://dev.gentoo.org/~dev-zero/glep/glep-glep.txt ?Your GLEP describes only two possible types: Technical and Organizational. Yes. At the same time type of your GLEP is informational. I can't use the new types

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Mario Fetka
Am Donnerstag, 19. Juni 2008 16:22:19 schrieb Olivier Crête: On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 14:08 +0200, Rémi Cardona wrote: Why only plugins? What's to stop an application from loading a normal library using libtool's dlopen wrapper (perhaps so it can fail gracefully if the library is missing,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Patrick Börjesson
On 2008-06-19 18:32, Nirbheek Chauhan uttered these thoughts: On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Patrick Börjesson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-06-19 04:09, George Prowse uttered these thoughts: In the end, PMS is just a way for them to spread their own agenda and force it on both the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Rémi Cardona
Olivier Crête a écrit : FOSS is the keyword here... the flash plugin dlopens a bunch of stuff While I haven't checked, I doubt that it uses libltdl to do so :) also kde-3.5 is using libtools dlopen for plugins Yep, but then again, it's for plugins. The real problem is with static linking

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:20:10 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's to stop an application from loading a normal library using libtool's dlopen wrapper (perhaps so it can fail gracefully if the library is missing, for example)? That's a pretty basic definition of a plugin. :)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Removing .la files...

2008-06-19 Thread Matthias Schwarzott
On Donnerstag, 19. Juni 2008, Jeroen Roovers wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:20:10 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's to stop an application from loading a normal library using libtool's dlopen wrapper (perhaps so it can fail gracefully if the library is missing, for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 09:06:21 +0100 David Leverton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The reason has already been explained multiple times, kindly stop with the personal attacks and silly conspiracy theories. In this case the attacks seem to be targeting a person who has been attacking an entire ~300

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Robert Bridge
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:11:11 +0100 Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 02:43:12 Chris Gianelloni wrote: Nope. What I see as a problem is that the primary author and current de facto maintainer is so much of an asshole that he was forcibly removed from the Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Ferris McCormick
On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 18:28 +0100, Robert Bridge wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:11:11 +0100 Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008 02:43:12 Chris Gianelloni wrote: Nope. What I see as a problem is that the primary author and current de facto maintainer is so

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread David Leverton
On Thursday 19 June 2008 18:06:17 Jeroen Roovers wrote: In this case the attacks seem to be targeting a person who has been attacking an entire ~300 person project for a few years now. Is it considered acceptable to attack someone as long as the attacker thinks they deserve it? I honestly

[gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Ivan Chernyavsky
Dear Gentoo developers, I am a grateful Gentoo user, I'm pretty happy with Gentoo and already have five installations of it, including one running a pilot project at my work. I started working with Linux 6 years ago and came through RH-SuSE-Ubuntu. None of them (except maybe SuSE 9.0 for some

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Arun Raghavan wrote: | On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Richard Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot | | This is the second time in 8 days that you are doing this. Please stop | filling our inboxes with this puerile

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 20:45:45 + Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The userrel team has decided to request a 5 day ban to the -dev ml for rbrown for his repeated misbehaviour, as noticed above, and that' now in place. It's good to see the userrel team is active. Will you be

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Andreas Aronsson
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, Ivan Chernyavsky wrote: Dear Gentoo developers, I am a grateful Gentoo user, I'm pretty happy with Gentoo and already have five installations of it, including one running a pilot project at my work. I started working with Linux 6 years ago and came through RH-SuSE-Ubuntu.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Benedikt Morbach
++ I'm a user too and I really find it annoying that one can't read this list to keep up with recent development, without digging to tons of FUD, insults and other crap. I personally came to the conclusion that it is best to simply ignore all mails from certain people (hint: Most of them were

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Bernd Steinhauser
Benedikt Morbach schrieb: ++ I'm a user too and I really find it annoying that one can't read this list to keep up with recent development, without digging to tons of FUD, insults and other crap. I personally came to the conclusion that it is best to simply ignore all mails from certain people

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:17:56 +0400 Ivan Chernyavsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Recently I've subscribed to this list because I thought this is the right way to start being involved in Gentoo development process --- I thought technical discussions are of most importance here. You are sadly

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Constantine D. Kardaris
++ first posts People keep trolling and there is none to make them stop and that's sad to watch happening for years. I'd like to involve also thats y i subscribed but really whats the motivation to do so? Feels like all those discussions with users that have been made last year have been just

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread RB
Regardless of the points being made or their validity, this is the long-standing problem with Gentoo: excessive pride and ego and too little inability to cooperate internally, much less externally. Too many people are treating every discussion (turned argument) as life-or-death and are unwilling

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:17:56 +0400 | * have some insane paranoid conviction that Freenode staff are the ones | busy spying on everything they say, whilst conveniently forgetting to | notice that Gentoo's own infra team and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:48:02 + Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:17:56 +0400 | * have some insane paranoid conviction that Freenode staff are the | ones busy spying on everything they say, whilst conveniently | forgetting

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:51 +0100 Mike Auty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And yet still you keep fighting? Why? Because unlike pretty much everyone else around here, I haven't given up on Gentoo. I still think it can have a future. What do you *need* from Gentoo that you can't get for yourself? I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Jan Kundrát
Benedikt Morbach wrote: retired and work on an alternative package manager and a certain dokument where they try to set gentoo standards from the outside. Please stop spreading FUD about PMS forcing some standards over Gentoo. Get your facts straight before commenting any further, thanks.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Thomas Rösner
Hi, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:51 +0100 Mike Auty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And yet still you keep fighting? Why? Because unlike pretty much everyone else around here, I haven't given up on Gentoo. I still think it can have a future. If you really think

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Jan Kundrát
Luca Barbato wrote: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/releng/#doc_chap5 The latest release of Gentoo Linux is: Gentoo Linux 2007.0 for Alpha, AMD64, HPPA, IA64, MIPS, PPC, S390, SH, SPARC, and x86 architectures. Good point, doc team please update those places. The GDP has zero control over

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 01:11:18 +0200 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:42:51 +0100 Mike Auty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And yet still you keep fighting? Why? Because unlike pretty much everyone else around here, I haven't given up on Gentoo. I still think it can have a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Jan Kundrát
Jeroen Roovers wrote: PS: I wanted to respond to many more of your comments, but then I always thought: who is this man anyway and does he perhaps contribute to Gentoo in some obscure way? Now I tend to think you don't. David seems to be a PMS contributor [1]. Cheers, -jkt [1]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Agenda [WAS: One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for June]

2008-06-19 Thread Luca Barbato
Jan Kundrát wrote: The GDP has zero control over /proj/en/releng (well, in fact any developer can commit to that area, but you generally aren't supposed to change a project's web page without their approval). This document is maintained by releng. Ok Additionally, if you really expect any

[gentoo-dev] What to do when Python 2.5 is blocking your package from entering stable? (Agenda for next council meeting?)

2008-06-19 Thread Samuli Suominen
I don't know about you, but when a package can't be stabled because it's depending on Python 2.5 and current stable is broken I'd like to start reverting stable keywords back to ~arch as noone wants to maintain broken junk. Latest being app-cdr/gtkcdlabel, and media-video/gaupol. Perhaps it should

Re: [gentoo-dev] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

2008-06-19 Thread Graham Murray
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * dismiss any technical criticism as being a 'corner case'. And not appreciate that addressing the 'corner cases' is very important and not to be dismissed. I have been a software developer (though not a Gentoo one) for 30 years, and learnt that lesson