Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New eclass: mate

2016-04-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 11/04/16 06:09, NP-Hardass wrote: > Greetings all, > > As all potential new eclasses are supposed to be discussed here, I > thought I'd file a message and see if anyone had anything to > contribute on the matter. > > I'm in the midst of a major version bump for the entirety of the MATE >

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] New eclass: mate

2016-04-10 Thread NP-Hardass
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Greetings all, As all potential new eclasses are supposed to be discussed here, I thought I'd file a message and see if anyone had anything to contribute on the matter. I'm in the midst of a major version bump for the entirety of the MATE desktop

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Joshua Kinard
On 04/10/2016 08:14, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: >> >> Create like, a table on the Wiki or some kind of metadata property >> per-package >> that can contain a boolean or tri-state flag indicating whether it works or >> doesn't

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2016-04-10 23:59 UTC

2016-04-10 Thread Robin H. Johnson
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2016-04-10 23:59 UTC. Removals: dev-db/etcdctl20160410-06:06 zmedicod6a77a1 dev-lang/go-bootstrap 20160410-17:53 williamh 75bb881 dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] CVS headers in ebuilds

2016-04-10 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 18:21:44 -0400 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 04/10/2016 05:36 PM, Gordon Pettey wrote: > > Or you could just use a branching workflow like Git has great > > support for, and create your overlay as a branch of the main tree > > you're copying ebuilds from. With

Re: [gentoo-dev] CVS headers in ebuilds

2016-04-10 Thread Michael Orlitzky
On 04/10/2016 05:36 PM, Gordon Pettey wrote: > Or you could just use a branching workflow like Git has great support > for, and create your overlay as a branch of the main tree you're copying > ebuilds from. With recent versions, you can even have checkouts of > different branches from the same

Re: [gentoo-dev] CVS headers in ebuilds

2016-04-10 Thread Gordon Pettey
Or you could just use a branching workflow like Git has great support for, and create your overlay as a branch of the main tree you're copying ebuilds from. With recent versions, you can even have checkouts of different branches from the same tree in different directories, so you're not

[gentoo-dev] [warning] the bug queue has 85 bugs

2016-04-10 Thread Alex Alexander
Our bug queue has 85 bugs! If you have some spare time, please help assign/sort a few bugs. To view the bug queue, click here: http://bit.ly/m8PQS5 Thanks!

[gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread »Q«
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 21:18:37 -0400 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 04:30:04PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote > > > Half the reason we don't officially support running without /usr > > mounted during early boot is that if we actually put everything in / > > that could conceivably

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 09:18:37PM -0400, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 04:30:04PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote > > Half the reason we don't officially support running without /usr > > mounted during early boot is that if we actually put everything in / > > that could

Re: [gentoo-dev] CVS headers in ebuilds

2016-04-10 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 06:16:05PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > Why would you need $Id$ feature for this? "git ls-files -s" gives you > the hash of the blob as well, is more efficient than grep, and even > works recursively on a directory tree. > >$ git ls-files -s --

Re: [gentoo-dev] CVS headers in ebuilds

2016-04-10 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Sat, 9 Apr 2016, Lars Wendler wrote: >>> > Yes, I still use these lines to check for ebuild changes between >>> > portage and my personal overlay. So please keep this line. > Enable the ident feature for *.ebuild files in git: > $ cat ~/gentoo/.git/info/attributes > *.ebuild ident

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 4/10/16 8:14 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Honestly, I'm still not quite sure why we're even having this > discussion. I don't think anybody actually intends to make any > changes at all. If they do, they should issue some kind of plan and > indicate what they're looking for from everybody

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Anthony G. Basile
On 4/10/16 7:55 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: > On 04/04/2016 21:19, William Hubbs wrote: >> All, >> >> I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lost >> track of the message where it was brought up, I would open a >> new thread to discuss it. Why is this coming up? What

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote: > > Create like, a table on the Wiki or some kind of metadata property per-package > that can contain a boolean or tri-state flag indicating whether it works or > doesn't work (or kinda works) on split-usr. Or a tracker on

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Joshua Kinard
On 04/04/2016 21:19, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lost > track of the message where it was brought up, I would open a > new thread to discuss it. > > When it came up before, some were saying that the /usr merge violates > the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > > Tho with the initr*, I did go the dracut route myself. But I'm still not > entirely convinced that I wouldn't have been better off rolling my own, > as I'm still not entirely comfortable with the level to which I >

[gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Duncan
Rich Freeman posted on Sat, 09 Apr 2016 21:07:46 -0400 as excerpted: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:09 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: >> >> I actually write my own initramfs because neither dracut not genkernel >> end up with a convenient boot system. >> >> I have 2 disks, both

[gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Duncan
Dale posted on Sat, 09 Apr 2016 13:42:37 -0500 as excerpted: > James Le Cuirot wrote: >> On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 12:09:38 -0400 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: >> I never really got the mentality that using an initramfs is a burden. >>> One more piece of software that can go wrong. You have to

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 02:09:35 +0200 "J. Roeleveld" wrote: > I actually write my own initramfs because neither dracut not > genkernel end up with a convenient boot system. > > I have 2 disks, both encrypted. > I prefer only to enter the decryption password once. Both Dracut

[gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Duncan
Nicolas Sebrecht posted on Sat, 09 Apr 2016 14:44:25 +0200 as excerpted: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 07:58:35AM +, Duncan wrote: > >> > I would also re-iterate, as I'm sure you're aware .. there ARE >> > differences between sbin and bin .. unless of course you spend all >> > your time in a

[gentoo-dev] Re: usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread Duncan
Luca Barbato posted on Sat, 09 Apr 2016 15:03:15 +0200 as excerpted: > On 09/04/16 14:37, Rich Freeman wrote: >> I've certainly haven't had many problems with dracut. When it fails it >> is usually because I'm doing something ELSE that is off-the-wall and it >> just doesn't have a plugin for it

Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge

2016-04-10 Thread J. Roeleveld
On Saturday, April 09, 2016 09:07:46 PM Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:09 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: > > I actually write my own initramfs because neither dracut not genkernel end > > up with a convenient boot system. > > > > I have 2 disks, both encrypted. > > I