On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 07:18:54AM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 11 September 2012 14:16, Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 04:14:17PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> >> Is there anything in particular in the spec/proposal for DEPENDENCIES
> >> that would exclude the addition of
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 15:48 +0200, Alex Legler escribió:
>> Sorta OT but a general thing: I think you should CC teams you want to
>> talk to and not only use the gentoo-systemd-flamewars^W^W-dev mailing
>> list where these teams might only f
El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 15:48 +0200, Alex Legler escribió:
> On 12.09.2012 19:59, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > Currently, package maintainers are CCed to security bugs when their are
> > needed. The problem is that, once maintainers add a fixed version and
> > tell security team they are
On 11 September 2012 14:16, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 04:14:17PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> Is there anything in particular in the spec/proposal for DEPENDENCIES
>> that would exclude the addition of individual "build: app-cat/myatom"
>> "run: app-cat/myatom" deps by an
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 04:24:27PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 03:39:19 -0700
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > 1) We disallow '@' in USE flags (yes, a use flag can actually have
> > '@' in it's name according to PMS; someone was hitting the crack
> > pipe pretty damn hard when
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, David Leverton wrote:
>> It's nice to be able to do
>> local SANDBOX_WRITE=${SANDBOX_WRITE}
>> and then allow bash to restore the old value at the end of the
>> function, regardless of how it exits. It's not the
Since the last ebuild using the old qt4.eclass has now been removed
from the tree, the Qt team wishes to lastrite this eclass. It will be
removed in 30 days. All ebuilds should be using qt4-r2.eclass instead.
--
Cheers,
Ben | yngwin
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 03:39:19 -0700
Brian Harring wrote:
> 1) We disallow '@' in USE flags (yes, a use flag can actually have
> '@' in it's name according to PMS; someone was hitting the crack
> pipe pretty damn hard when they allowed that one). This doesn't
> impact anything in gentoo-x86, nor
On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 03:39 -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
> Hola.
>
> CC'ing pms since obviously they should comment, although the
> discussion should be on -dev (aka, public, not an alias).
>
> Sorry, this is a long email; condensing it down into a glep is viable,
> just my time is limited (it's
On 12.09.2012 19:59, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Hello
>
> Currently, package maintainers are CCed to security bugs when their are
> needed. The problem is that, once maintainers add a fixed version and
> tell security team they are ok to get it stabilized, maintainers are
> kept CCed until bug is closed
Hola.
CC'ing pms since obviously they should comment, although the
discussion should be on -dev (aka, public, not an alias).
Sorry, this is a long email; condensing it down into a glep is viable,
just my time is limited (it's telling I started the gentoo stuff at
2am, wrapping up likely at 4am
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 01:53:21AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Brian Harring wrote:
> > Currently, there is a minor amount of ebuild/eclass usage of things
> > named __*; ~90% of it is 'import once' eclass code like the following:
> >
> > """
> > if [[ ${___ECLAS
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, David Leverton wrote:
> It's nice to be able to do
> local SANDBOX_WRITE=${SANDBOX_WRITE}
> and then allow bash to restore the old value at the end of the
> function, regardless of how it exits. It's not the end of the world
> to lose this, but it would be a bit of
On 13 September 2012 06:48, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Sep 2012, Brian Harring wrote:
>> For SANDBOX_*, while that's a PM internal, that's a bit of a grey
>> zone; regardless, we can actually address that via extending the
>> sandbox functions a bit:
>>
>> addwrite [-r|--remove] pathw
10.09.2012 05:55, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Just an announcement that app-emulation/qemu-kvm will be pkgmove'd to
> app-emulation/qemu at some point this week. The app-emulation/qemu
> ebuilds will effectively die and be replaced by the
> app-emulation/qemu-kvm ebuilds. I've brought this
El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 03:43 +0200, Jeroen Roovers escribió:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 20:53:20 +0200
> Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> > > You can un-CC yourself. I don't see why security@ should be doing
> > > the legwork.
> >
> > It shouldn't be so hard to do, they can do it just when they CC
> > arches,
El mié, 12-09-2012 a las 18:30 -0400, Sean Amoss escribió:
> On 09/12/2012 02:54 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 04:30 +1000, Michael Palimaka escribió:
> >> On 2012-09-13 03:59, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >>> Hello
> >>>
> >>> Currently, package maintainers are CCed to security bugs
El mié, 12-09-2012 a las 18:30 -0400, Sean Amoss escribió:
> On 09/12/2012 02:54 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El jue, 13-09-2012 a las 04:30 +1000, Michael Palimaka escribió:
> >> On 2012-09-13 03:59, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >>> Hello
> >>>
> >>> Currently, package maintainers are CCed to security bugs
18 matches
Mail list logo
