On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:00:25PM +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:42:47 -0700
> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What is the current "election" name that we should use when running
> > votify?
>
> > > To vo
On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 10:57:14AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Well, we don't yet have reliable software in place to _count_ votes,
> but that's no reason not to start collecting them. The polls are now
> open, and will remain so until UTC 20060911 (one month). To vote,
> log into dev.g.o
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 04:28:42PM +0200, Mivz wrote:
> How free is free software if you need a lawyer and a expensive server
> just to be able to publish your addition under your own name?
*plonk*
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 12:43:49AM +0200, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > Have a link for this patch?
>
> Sorry, I forgot to give it in my original posting:
>
>http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/bugme-new/2006-June/006422.html
That bug does not include
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 01:31:17PM +0200, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
> > Testing of 2.6.17 is very much appreciated, please also file bugs
> > against problems you have with the kernel itself :)
>
> For the e1000 driver to work on my new ThinkPad X60s I had to patch
> Linux
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 10:07:07PM +0200, Mivz wrote:
> Why is it that when I use the new kernel SATA drivers and load is as
> /dev/sda it is slower as with the old IDE drivers?
You didn't tell us which sata drivers you were using, nor what kernel
version.
Either way, try asking this on the linux
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 11:05:00AM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> The udev/nss_ldap thing has been brewing for a while, and we're still trying
> to
> get upstream udev to fix the issue.
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99564#c44
>
> In that comment I list the proper solution that upstre
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:18:05PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:08:08AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 01:45:30PM +0200, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> > > Also, git-sources *should* use this eclass once it is in the tree since
>
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 01:45:30PM +0200, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> Also, git-sources *should* use this eclass once it is in the tree since
> people using it will save _lots_ of bandwidth and disk space.
Yes, I'll convert it over once you feel it is ready, just let me know.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 09:54:53AM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 May 2006 19:27, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 03 May 2006 12:26, Jakub Moc wrote:
> > > > Well, it should not be load
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 01:22:39PM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 May 2006 12:26, Jakub Moc wrote:
> > Well, it should not be loaded first of all... Hence why I want to have
> > an ability to turn off the coldplug thing *completely* on udev level.
>
> So maybe I should be clear in con
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 05:00:10PM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Alexandre Buisse wrote:
> >The opensolaris project has done a similar thing[1]. The three finalists
> >were bazaar[2], mercurial[3] and git[4], and the winner was eventually
> >mercurial. This is also the recommended choice from the
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 10:52:38PM -0500, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 07 April 2006 19:39, Roy Marples wrote:
> >>> ... some just want a generic Gentoo business card and the
> >>> ones we had were great, but when you get into real conversations, the guy
> >>> wants
On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 07:57:43PM -0500, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Fernando J. Pereda wrote: [Sat Mar 25 2006, 06:18:52PM EST]
> > Well, I find it easier to understand than many other DVCSs out there...
> > In fact I don't think it is difficult to use in any way. Maybe pre-1.1
> > versions had some s
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 08:20:01PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 19:59, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On Mar 22, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Olivier Crete wrote:
> > > If modular X is used and gnome-base/control-center is not
> > > patched..
> > > gnome-settings-daemon on some ev
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 08:50:07PM +0100, Christian Bricart wrote:
> Richard Fish wrote:
> >On 2/21/06, Christian Bricart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>So I have /dev/hda through /dev/hdl which are ok. But the mappings to
> >>/dev/discs/discX with X > 7 are missing.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 08:31:12AM +0100, Christian Bricart wrote:
> Hi,
>
> yesterday I've noticed, that some mappings in /dev/discs are missing on
> my machine.
> Actually I have an additional ATA controller with some discs attached.
> So I have /dev/hda through /dev/hdl which are ok. But the ma
On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 01:41:41PM +0100, Jan Kundr?t wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > And if someone wants to forward this over to -user, feel free.
>
> Do you want to have this kernel documented in our Kernel guide [1]?
>
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-kernel.xml#doc
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 11:24:57AM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> | On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 10:27:46AM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> |>Where should people file bugs on this?
> |
> |
> | To quote the einfo text that is shown when you install this kernel:
&
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 10:27:46AM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> | Well, it's not a Gentoo specific plea, but a Linux kernel plea. I've
> | created a new kernel tree, git-sources, that tracks the upstream
> | development kernel tree every day (not the
Well, it's not a Gentoo specific plea, but a Linux kernel plea. I've
created a new kernel tree, git-sources, that tracks the upstream
development kernel tree every day (not the raw git tree, but the nightly
snapshots of it.)
If you want to help out with kernel development testing, please run
thes
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 05:24:52PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 01:56:03PM +0530, Shyam Mani wrote:
> > [2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/modular-x-howto.xml
>
> You mean:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/x/x11/modular-x-howto.xml
> right?
FYI
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 04:31:30AM +, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 07:57:06PM -0800 or thereabouts, Greg KH wrote:
> > > Which is why Gentoo has jumped the shark and is now on a long, slow
> > > decline.
> >
> > Ok, then what should Gentoo
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 07:56:30AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>
> You guys are more than welcome to go apply at Red Hat or Novell.
Some of us already work for companies that produce other Linux
distributions or support the companies that do. :)
thanks,
greg k-h
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mai
On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 03:58:57AM +, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 01:17:06PM -0500 or thereabouts, Chris Gianelloni
> wrote:
> > Gentoo is not a distribution of Linux. Gentoo is not anything more than
> > a loosely bound group of developers all doing their own thing in a
> > c
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 01:56:03PM +0530, Shyam Mani wrote:
> [2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/modular-x-howto.xml
You mean:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/x/x11/modular-x-howto.xml
right?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 10:52:43PM +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>
> I wonder ... can we have one precise mission statement without
> alienating a big part of our user base?
To copy another opensource group's mission statement,
"Total World Domination"
Hey, it's been working for them so f
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 03:40:57PM -0700, Joshua Baergen wrote:
> As many of you no doubt have noticed, spyderous and I finished bumping
> the modular packages to the newly released 7.0, which includes many
> changes and bug fixes since 6.8.2. Over the next few weeks we'll be
> finalizing licen
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 01:17:38PM +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 08:43:32PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > That being said, my boxes have an empty /dev...
>
> you so sure about that ? if your /dev is completely empty, you wont
> get any init output becau
On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 12:45:00PM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> maillog: 02/12/2005-02:47:55(+): Stephen Bennett types
> > On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 03:35:23 +0100
> > Matthias Langer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > revealed that there are in fact hundrets of premade device nodes in
> > > th
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 10:49:04PM +0100, twofourtysix wrote:
> On 05/09/05, Petteri R?ty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a couple of old machines I maintain and emerging and unmerging
> > kernel sources take a while because there are so many files. Also one
> > set of gentoo sources takes ab
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 07:40:03PM -0400, Kumba wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >Oops, yes, the 064 release fixed that. Sorry for not updateing the
> >bugzilla entry. That is now taken care of.
>
> Just out of curiosity, know what happened to cause that?
Unaligned d
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 07:23:32PM -0400, Kumba wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> >Ok, 064-r1 version of udev does this for tty and console devices. The
> >old devfs names are now gone. Because of this, and some other config
> >file tweaks, starting udev now only takes .5 se
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 10:12:52AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 10:18:12AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > To start with, the 061 version of udev offers a big memory savings if
> > > you use t
On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 10:53:15AM -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> > Just to make sure I am not missing something.
> >
> > Does this cover the
> >
> > - If you are upgrading from a version of udev prior to 046 ...
> > - If you are upgrading from a version of udev prior to 050
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 12:37:52AM +0100, Carlos Silva wrote:
>
> Sorry to only reply to this now, but i saw a mail of you talking about
> ndevfs. will that go into 2.6.13? not that i use devfs, 'cause i don't,
> i'm just curious.
No, ndevfs was written in a bout of temporary insanity. I will no
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:56:30PM -0400, Kumba wrote:
> John Mylchreest wrote:
> >
> >No objections here. I've been waiting fort his move for a little while
> >now. The only real problems will be with those 2.4 (devfs) users who
> >refuse to move, maybe this is good enough incentive.
>
> Just to
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 10:00:31AM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> > # vc devices
> > -KERNEL=="vcs", NAME="vcc/0", SYMLINK+="%k", GROUP="tty"
> > -KERNEL=="vcs[0-9]*", NAME="vcc/%n", SYMLINK+="%k", GROUP="tty"
> > -KERNEL=="vcsa",NAME="vcc/a0", SYMLINK+="%k", GRO
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:35:58AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 15:25 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 07:49:34PM +0200, Michiel de Bruijne wrote:
> > > I.o.w. is it still necessary to have RC_DEVICE_TARBALL="yes" as a
>
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 07:49:34PM +0200, Michiel de Bruijne wrote:
> On Thursday 07 July 2005 00:46, Greg KH wrote:
> > Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's
> > time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently
&
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 10:18:12AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > To start with, the 061 version of udev offers a big memory savings if
> > you use the "default" kernel name of a device[3]. If you do that, it does
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 01:22:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 13:52 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 03:55:45PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > Ok, now that
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 02:39:51AM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> maillog: 06/07/2005-15:46:51(-0700): Greg KH types
> > Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's
> > time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently
&
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 08:52:20PM +0100, John Mylchreest wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > If we can move away from some of our devfs-like names, we stand to
> > reclaim a lot of memory from everyone's machines. As an example, if we
> > drop
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 03:55:45PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:46 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's
> > time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently
&
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:06:04AM +0100, Roy Marples wrote:
>
> This has absolutely zero to do with udev, but the point is that devfs vs
> udev "flames" cannot be ignored until non udev supported kernels from
> all arches are removed from the tree.
It also has nothing to do with the naming schem
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 03:46:51PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> [3] HAL needs a patch to be able to handle this. It's posted on the
> hal development mailing lists and will be checked in real-soon-now.
Here it is, if any of the "Gentopia" developers want to add it to our
Ok, now that devfs is removed from the 2.6 kernel tree[1], I think it's
time to start to revisit some of the /dev naming rules that we currently
are living with[2].
To start with, the 061 version of udev offers a big memory savings if
you use the "default" kernel name of a device[3]. If you do th
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 07:55:50PM -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> I'd like Gentoo to be a place where neat things are developed.
> If RH or SuSE (or another for-profit Linux vendor) wants to take some
> of those developments and use them to make a profit, that's fine with
> me. We're over here havin
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 11:27:42PM +0200, Lorenzo Hernandez Garcia-Hierro wrote:
> El mi?, 11-05-2005 a las 13:12 -0700, Greg KH escribi?:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 09:10:46PM +0200, Lorenzo Hernandez Garcia-Hierro
> > wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 09:10:46PM +0200, Lorenzo Hernandez Garcia-Hierro wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After some talk to gregkh, I've decided to send this message as it might
> give some light regarding the breakage of the USB modules when usbcore
> is built-in instead of compiled as module.
>
> Modules tha
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 04:20:57PM -0600, Ryan wrote:
> Oh yea, and expect to get LOTS of wise cracks such as this below. Just
> ignore those.
I was not just trying to make a joke, I was serious. If you do not
understand how to attract open source developers, or even where they are
located at, t
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 03:35:25PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here's my questions:
>
> 1) How / where do I find and recruit top notch Linux kernel, application and
> game developers?
>
> 2) How would we best go about soliciting open source developers to help us
> out
> and what's the be
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 11:16:23PM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote:
> There are currently 6 (7 after I'll commit new ffmpeg) ieee1394 use.local
> flags.
> I think this is worth moving it as a global useflag.
>
> Someone disagrees?
Why is it a useflag at all? Does this mean I can create a
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:57:29PM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote:
> On Monday 18 April 2005 20:27, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > if by commit you mean the profiles then i think you should go make a list
> > of specific USE flags and drop it onto the gentoo-dev list before
> > committing :p:p -
On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 10:30:29PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
>
> A while back, we had to move the gentoo kernel patches out of the Gentoo CVS
> because we realised it conflicted with the old copyright assignment form: I
> have signed an agreement saying that everything I put in gentoo cvs will be
201 - 256 of 256 matches
Mail list logo
