Hi!
Here's another chance to be reminded that Gentoo is about choice:
how about a config file that comes with a pre-set list of packages
that are important (if they're installed), for example e2fsprogs,
the init system, stuff like that. But the user can add to this
list (cryptsetup if it's
Victor Ostorga vosto...@gentoo.org said:
Lately I have stepeed into bug 216461 init systems in sys-apps as well
as in sys-process and even app-admin and was about to moving
sys-process/minit to sys/apps-minit , but stepped into bug 190982
move sys-process/{minit,runit} and app-admin/jinit to
On Saturday 10 October 2009 23:30:05 Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
On Samstag, 10. Oktober 2009, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Alin Năstac mrn...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 10/9/09 7:57 PM, Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
* does new scripts already can do all that was
On Dienstag, 13. Oktober 2009, Markos Chandras wrote:
I agree with Nirbheek. You should always provide an updated documentation (
and a news item if necessary ) when you release a new major update of such
core packages. I would like to see new openrc masked until the
documentation is ready
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:23:32PM +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
On Saturday 10 October 2009 23:30:05 Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
On Samstag, 10. Oktober 2009, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Alin N??stac mrn...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 10/9/09 7:57 PM, Matthias
William Hubbs wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:23:32PM +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
On Saturday 10 October 2009 23:30:05 Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
On Samstag, 10. Oktober 2009, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Alin N??stac mrn...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:55:45PM +0200, Branko Badrljica wrote:
Main question is NOT whether it works for you, but whether it will break
stuff on significant percent of other users.
It broke on my machine, for example, and it was quite disconcerting,
since it was at quite inconvenient
On 11-10-2009 17:14:29 +0200, Torsten Veller wrote:
* Fabian Groffen (grobian) grob...@gentoo.org:
grobian 09/10/11 15:04:33
Modified: ChangeLog getmail-4.9.2.ebuild
Log:
Use ED for Prefix compatability, marked ~ppc-macos and ~x64-solaris
[snip]
Can you please
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:47 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
The default is to use the old net.ethx style network scripts, which
still work as usual, so, that is why I said that I disagree about there
being a regression. A regression means that something worked before,
but it
William Hubbs wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:55:45PM +0200, Branko Badrljica wrote:
Main question is NOT whether it works for you, but whether it will break
stuff on significant percent of other users.
It broke on my machine, for example, and it was quite disconcerting,
since it was at
Branko Badrljica schrieb:
William Hubbs wrote:
If you accept the defaults and it doesn't work, I will gladly agree that
there is a major regression and the package should be masked. On the
other hand, if the new network scripts do not work, I don't see that as
a show stopper. Yes, I would
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:43:49PM +0200, Branko Badrljica wrote:
Which I did. I don't have openrc in /etc/portage/package.use, so it was
emerged with default USE flags ( if you count default as in as set in
make.conf ). emerge -pv openrc woould emerge it as:
sys-apps/openrc-0.5.1
Thomas Sachau wrote:
SNIP
I disagree in this place. ~arch is called testing because it actually is about
TESTING new versions
and packages. You should expect problems and you should be able to recover from
them and you should
be able to use bugzilla. Else i suggest you move to a stable arch
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:22:13 +0200
Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote:
We are working on a proper explanation targetted to devs of this. I'm
sorry for the inconvenience caused.
How large of a change to the tree will this involve? Is it a small
number of packages that need to be fixed
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:33:27 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Thomas Sachau wrote:
I disagree in this place. ~arch is called testing because it actually is
about TESTING new versions and packages. You should expect problems and
you should be able to recover from them and you should be able to
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 01:33:27AM +0200, Branko Badrljica wrote:
1. Much of the time on Gentoo using of ~ packages is not user explicit
choice but forced compromise.
I don't remember exactly anymore what prompted me to enter openrc in
package.keywords, but I surely remember having a few
Mike Frysinger wrote:
i really dont buy this argument, but ignoring that, poor admin policy is no
excuse. blindly accepting all unstable versions of a package instead of
pinning a specific version and then expecting a stable system isnt going to
happen. Thomas is absolutely right here.
On Wednesday 14 October 2009 02:41:51 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
i really dont buy this argument, but ignoring that, poor admin policy is
no excuse. blindly accepting all unstable versions of a package instead
of pinning a specific version and then expecting a stable
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52:06AM +0200, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
sapphire ~ # qlist openrc | grep doc
/usr/share/doc/openrc/net.example
/usr/share/doc/openrc/net.default
That would be lovely if the concerns being raised weren't about 0.5.1,
that's the output from a 0.4.3 series install.
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 20:41:51 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
i really dont buy this argument, but ignoring that, poor admin policy is
no excuse. blindly accepting all unstable versions of a package instead
of pinning a specific version and then expecting a stable
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 01:03:22AM +0200, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
On Wednesday 14 October 2009 00:59:26 sch...@subverted.org wrote:
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52:06AM +0200, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
sapphire ~ # qlist openrc | grep doc
/usr/share/doc/openrc/net.example
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:52:06 +0200
Dawid Węgliński c...@gentoo.org wrote:
Upstream already provides such a documentation as you can see above. Gentoo
provides migration guide. I believe doc team will update use flag description
as soon as it's possible.
In this case, As soon as it's possible
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:54:31 +0200
Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
I disagree in this place. ~arch is called testing because it actually is
about TESTING new versions and packages. You should expect problems and you
should be able to recover from them and you should be able to use
Dawid Węgliński wrote:
sapphire ~ # qlist openrc | grep doc
/usr/share/doc/openrc/net.example
/usr/share/doc/openrc/net.default
As said, I already did that. In fact, that was the first thing I was
looking for. After seeing post here about radical changes in v0.5, that
was the first thing I
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:30:52 Joshua Saddler wrote:
All that to say, Tommy (et al), is that the idea of expecting users to
magically know everything and not to offer any documentation *in advance*
. . . is a silly idea. Good lord, can you imagine the shitstorm the X11
team would have
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 22:15:52 Branko Badrljica wrote:
This time, machine boots and sets both lo and eth0 without any error
message, but it fails to set default route, so without manual route add
default gw 192.168.1.1 net is dead. And machine is stuck at checking
local filesystems for a
On Mittwoch, 14. Oktober 2009, sch...@subverted.org wrote:
Oh, you mean the docs that only cover the old configuration mechanism
and are only installed with USE=oldnet? How silly to think that changes
that are likely to take testers' machines offline should be documented,
if nothing else
On Friday 09 October 2009 13:57:07 Matthias Schwarzott wrote:
As some of you have waited long for this to happen, sys-apps/openrc-0.5.1
is there.
btw, i didnt thank you for handling this. so thanks. uNF.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org said:
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:30:52 Joshua Saddler wrote:
All that to say, Tommy (et al), is that the idea of expecting users to
magically know everything and not to offer any documentation *in advance*
. . . is a silly idea. Good lord, can you
Mike Frysinger wrote:
the mailing list is not bugzilla. any complaints you have about USE=oldnet
have nothing to do with this thread. it's a bug and should be treated as
such.
-mike
Which is why I have posted here to gripe about having documented such
changes in future.
I was told
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 22:36:44 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
the mailing list is not bugzilla. any complaints you have about
USE=oldnet have nothing to do with this thread. it's a bug and should be
treated as such.
Which is why I have posted here to gripe about
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 20:33:35 Mark Loeser wrote:
Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org said:
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:30:52 Joshua Saddler wrote:
All that to say, Tommy (et al), is that the idea of expecting users to
magically know everything and not to offer any documentation *in
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 22:48:01 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 22:36:44 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
the mailing list is not bugzilla. any complaints you have about
USE=oldnet have nothing to do with this thread. it's a bug
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 22:48:01 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 22:36:44 Branko Badrljica wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
the mailing list is not bugzilla. any complaints you have about
USE=oldnet have
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:33:35 -0400
Mark Loeser halc...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'd say this isn't correct. Unstable isn't a pure testing playground.
its meant for packages that should be considered for stable.
I happen to disagree. Since the advent of outside overlays and layman,
we've seen many
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 08:40:48PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
USE=oldnet is documented, end of story. you're complaining about a *bug*,
not
lack of documentation. stop mixing the two as you're only muddling this
thread.
I don't think you are going to find anyone here stating that the
On Tuesday 13 October 2009 21:26:40 sch...@subverted.org wrote:
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 08:40:48PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
USE=oldnet is documented, end of story. you're complaining about a
*bug*, not lack of documentation. stop mixing the two as you're only
muddling this thread.
37 matches
Mail list logo
