Can we get this on the website/announce? I agree that auto-use is the
suck and that it needs to die a long excrutiating death, but I think a
lot of users will be like wtf when 2.1 hits stable and --newuse turns up
a massive crapload of packages.
Whether this announced now, or when
Patrick Lauer wrote:
Hi all,
as the debate about the future direction of Gentoo continues it's
getting more and more obvious to me that there's a lack of information
skewing the debate. It seems that while most devs (and users) have a
good idea what's happening in their projects it's quite
Matthew Marlowe wrote:
Hi all,
The following are just my opinions/summaries:
1) It appears that the most dissatisfied devs are those
who have been proponents of the enterprise aspect
of gentoo. When they say that not much has been
accomplished in the last 2 years, I think you have to
look
Marius Mauch wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 22:47:21 -0500
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this months meeting wasnt too eventful, kind of quiet ... on the
agenda:
- Marius: decision on multi-hash for Manifest1
there was a bit of hearsay about why the council was asked to
review/decide
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 00:35:07 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| I've been trying to sit in #gentoo more often ( I figured insanity
| would be a good excuse for my crummy grades ) and I am scared by the
| fact that people still walk in
Jakub Moc wrote:
22.11.2005, 20:57:15, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
The idea was to move out the stage1/stage2 docs to somewhere else. Then
create some sort of Advanced Installation Topics guide or something, to
list out the replacement procedures for customizing a system from a stage3
tarball,
So who do I have to bribe to get my packages on the bad QA list? :)
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 02:38:13AM +, Dan Meltzer wrote:
However, I've seen a few packages that fetch stuff during the test
phase from the internet
if you have any packages
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Monday 07 November 2005 19:22, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Sure. What's the point? What benefit does one tar have over the other?
How is bsdtar more capable in any situation than gnutar?
the first point is not to change the default behavior of an userland, so
Jason Stubbs wrote:
On Friday 04 November 2005 23:26, Xavier Neys wrote:
Nathan L. Adams wrote:
One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/
Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds,
summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that
the website is
Andrej Kacian wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 18:18:55 +
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Before this, make pre-install and post-install emerge messages more
| usable, instead of having them lost among thousands of gibberish text
| in batch emerges.
Separate issue. That one's the
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 11:16:54 -0600 Joshua Baergen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| RDEPEND lists the things that are needed to use a package once it is
| installed.
|
| Maybe RDEPEND is insufficient to properly describe a library
| package. I see a
Dan Armak wrote:
On Thursday 20 October 2005 21:48, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On 20/10/2005 21:16:47, Dan Armak ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On Thursday 20 October 2005 20:58, Matthijs van der Vleuten wrote:
On 10/20/05, Dan Armak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To solve this issue it would have to
FYI elog is implemented in CVS ( 2.1 ). When it will be released is
anyone's guess.
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On 11/10/2005 9:18:41, Dave Nebinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
This is probably the fifth time at least that I've been bitten by this...
m h wrote:
Hey Folks-
I'm working on trying to get prefixed installs working. (As such, I'm
using some code kindly modified by Michael Haubenwallner. ) I'm now
in python code (portage) and would like to compare what I have with
gentoo proper.
Is this the location of the latest up to date
/gentoo-alt/). If anyone can
elaborate on the efforts going on in that arena, I'm all ears.
matt
On 10/5/05, Alec Joseph Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
m h wrote:
Hey Folks-
I'm working on trying to get prefixed installs working. (As such, I'm
using some code kindly modified by Michael
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:03:37 +0100 Ed W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| As an outsider reading that summary the message *I* read is that
| there is some strain over fitting the development model into
| stable, ~, and package.mask. I think I see people basically
| saying that
Kristian Benoit wrote:
Hi Jason and other folks,
I saw your last comment on http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73350
about most the these feature to be present in the next major version.
That is really great to read.
On that subject, I'd like to have an idea about when we should expect
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 09:48:25 -0700 Donnie Berkholz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Tom Martin wrote:
| | Hi list,
| |
| | Bug 97447 wants a logrotate USE flag, which is used by about five
| | packages locally. Unless there are any objections, I'll globalify it
| | later today.
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jason Stubbs wrote:
| The reason behind this is that at approximately two thirds of bugs
received
| are feature requests and they are drowning at the real bugs. More
importantly,
| the critical bugs are becoming very hard
Simon Stelling wrote:
Hi,
Duncan wrote:
and see what's up, or one can visit the website and check it out there,
but for such a critical part of a Gentoo machine's infrastructure, one
would certainly wish for something a bit easier than either of these.
Erm, is that a joke? You want an
Simon Stelling wrote:
Alec Joseph Warner wrote:
to get you upgrade information. While I can see a great benefit in
putting important information into the changelog, I really can't see why
portage should provide functions to read a changelog, when nearly all
packages provide the same
Maurice van der Pot wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 10:05:49PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
Recent discussion on this ML and on the portage-ml as well as
#gentoo-portage regarding pkg_warn() and the basic concept behind it.
We talked about adding new functionality, about adding a warning section
Caleb Tennis wrote:
snip
2. You'll force a user to upgrade to qt 3.3 if they attempt to install any
package that depends on Qt. Speaking from personal experience, I still have
some servers using Qt 3.1 because I have programs running 24/7 that rely on
Qt and simply cannot be upgraded right
Philip Webb wrote:
050421 Juha Varkki wrote:
050421 Mike Frysinger wrote:
we've had 'bc' and 'ed' around for historical reasons
and because we've never actually tracked what packages invoke them
Do you mean /usr/bin/bc or did I miss something?
Why on earth are you taking it out? I use bc quite
If someone is willing to do the work and not fsck things royally I don't
see a big deal about it. If nothing in system depends on it then it
shouldn't be there, we can trim 250kb off of all our stages and
liveCD's. Embedded gains 250kb off of their stuff as well. I just
don't want to see
25 matches
Mail list logo
