of work with
either || () / $ROOT such as Donnie or Alec should also be
able to give some insights also.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
, stating exactly this.
...
This is absurd. The council shouldn't need to make every decision in
Gentoo itself. It should be able to delegate power to any group it chooses.
Thanks for pointing this out Donnie.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
it excels).
--
Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
--
Mobile: +55 (81) 9927 0010
Phone: +1 (347) 624 6296; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ#: 17249123
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG: 0xB640E1A2 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED
the dep resolver even more complex ;)
Also don't really see a need for such a feature, pretty much no benefit
with a lot of additional complexity.
agreed.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
a patch also which should help you track down offending programs
as they occur. should catch all cases of 'install -s' also.
http://tinderbox.x86.dev.gentoo.org/portage/local/patches/sys-devel/binutils/binutils-gentoo-strip-safe.patch
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev
and is really uncool with 4.1
is that -fno-stack-protector-all is missing and wont be added
back without several somebodies making a case for it upstream.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
the
unicode capabilities are available without any configuration.
I forget where I read it but I thought that unicode lead to overflows
and was considered a general security risk. I wish I knew where I read
that but I'm unable to find it.
Any list readers know anything relating to that?
--
solar
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 20:18 +0100, Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 12:47:33 -0500
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I forget where I read it but I thought that unicode lead to overflows
and was considered a general security risk. I wish I knew where I read
that but I'm
deprecating 'action'
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
if that fixes it
It should be beecrypt that is the cause of it.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=132149#c9
-mike
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
in the GLEP to
help you read it, the actual file format will not be like that
I hope that is is the case.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
by devs
running as normal users which will be broken by this.
Your right. I've hit that bug myself in the past switching
between root merges and being a real life dev and running ebuild
foo.build clean unpack compile;
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org
users too.
I'd say I could just run with the extra
flags in the hardened/* profiles but it seems a good portion of the
users these days seem to be vanilla users using 'gcc-config 1'
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
declared a preference. for example, if you
have neither '-cups' or 'cups' in your USE (either in your make.conf,
profile, env, whatever), but you do have the net-print/cups package
installed, portage will add 'cups' to your USE
-mike
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev
Monthly Gentoo Council Meeting for Jan 2006.
Present:
Koon (Thierry Carrez)
Swift (Sven Vermeulen)
agriffis (Aron Griffis)
seemant (Seemant Kulleen)
solar (Ned Ludd)
vapier (Mike Frysinger)
Absent:
azarah (Martin Schlemmer)
Where abouts unknown for the last 30 days.
Attendance
should be tied to a USE= flag?
If so should it be a 'no*certs' flag or a USE=cacerts ?
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
is outside
the
library search path (and it should be). You might want to use ld.so.conf
with
the rpath attribute of the binary to determine which libraries to consider.
Working on it with solar. I just put the || in there until I have
something better. Thinking about libstdc++-v3 having
.
bin/emerge - (-q/--quiet trigger)
Sets noiselimit to -1
and uses writemsg_stdout in a few places.
bin/ebuild.sh - (ulgy not attached)
bin/prepstrip - (ulgy not attached)
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--- pym/portage_util.py (revision 2485)
+++ pym/portage_util.py (working copy
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 20:29 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:45:04 -0500
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you do that please set it as a blocker for the .54 release.
Reintroducing ChangeLog/metadata.xml to Manifests would be a undesired
regression. Nothing
, or if its
an alright move and people aren't going to stab me for marking it stable.
einfo $stuff and mark it stable later today wins my vote.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
. As for hardened and 2.4.x it seems most of our users are wanting
2.6.x now and unless users/devs show interest I can't really see us
needing to produce a new set of 2.4.x based 2006.x stages.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
).
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:58 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:29 -0500, solar wrote:
Now, on the topic of the tarballs.
Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2
tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball.
Stage1: Changing
of every single package using libfoo.
--
solar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
24 matches
Mail list logo
