On Friday 01 December 2006 13:47, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Actually, we would have to review the process, since not everything that
> gets a security bug ends up with a GLSA. My current loose rule is that
> if it deserves a GLSA, then it deserves and update, but I don't know the
> exact criteria
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 07:22 -0600, Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> Steve Long wrote:
> >>> There'll always be GLSA's to respond to. That's another issue that
> >>> needs to be handled w/ a slow-moving tree. Are you going to restrict
> >>> changes in the slow-moving tree only to changes against a GLSA?
>
Steve Long wrote:
There'll always be GLSA's to respond to. That's another issue that
needs to be handled w/ a slow-moving tree. Are you going to restrict
changes in the slow-moving tree only to changes against a GLSA?
That's what we've said.
I don't have a problem with this at all. The slow-
>> There'll always be GLSA's to respond to. That's another issue that
>> needs to be handled w/ a slow-moving tree. Are you going to restrict
>> changes in the slow-moving tree only to changes against a GLSA?
>
> That's what we've said.
>
I don't have a problem with this at all. The slow-moving
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:01:11 + "Stuart Herbert"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > As of this release, I kept a copy of all of the distfiles for the
| > entire release, and can make a DVD of it, on request. This
|
Stuart Herbert wrote:
On 11/29/06, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stuart Herbert wrote:
I have a couple of locations where I could store backups, depending on
size and projected growth. I suppose it'll have to wait until 2007.0
though so we can actually gage it as opposed to speculating w
On 11/29/06, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stuart Herbert wrote:
I have a couple of locations where I could store backups, depending on
size and projected growth. I suppose it'll have to wait until 2007.0
though so we can actually gage it as opposed to speculating wildly.
If anything ha
Stuart Herbert wrote:
[snip]
Thank you. Do we have backups in place covering these files? Have we
tested the backups to confirm that they actually work?
I have a couple of locations where I could store backups, depending on
size and projected growth. I suppose it'll have to wait until 2007.0
On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What are the arrangements should you go under a bus on the way home
> from work tonight?
You'd like that, wouldn't you?
That was _completely_ uncalled for.
"go under a bus" is just a phrase that's commonly used here in the UK
(because
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:01:11 + "Stuart Herbert"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > As of this release, I kept a copy of all of the distfiles for the
| > entire release, and can make a DVD of it, on request. This
| > fulfills our requiremen
Stuart Herbert wrote:
On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As of this release, I kept a copy of all of the distfiles for the entire
release, and can make a DVD of it, on request. This fulfills our
requirements with the GPL.
What are the arrangements should you go under a b
On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 16:01 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As of this release, I kept a copy of all of the distfiles for the entire
> > release, and can make a DVD of it, on request. This fulfills our
> > requirements with the GPL.
>
>
On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As of this release, I kept a copy of all of the distfiles for the entire
release, and can make a DVD of it, on request. This fulfills our
requirements with the GPL.
What are the arrangements should you go under a bus on the way home
from
On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 02:21 -0500, Alec Warner wrote:
> The bonus is that we then need to have a fetcher that runs over the main
> tree and all supported release trees, and this of course increases
> mirror size as we now have distfiles in the tree from a year ago to
> support a year old release
On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 06:37 +, Steve Long wrote:
> .. The one
> > disadvantage to my design is it needs infra. It needs it's own
> > repository and rsync.
> >
> What does that entail? Would a co-located server suffice?
Sure. It would be much better to simply use what we currently have,
tho
Steve Long wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
From your post we need to add:
- strip all USE flags that aren't used from use.mask (per-profile)
- strip all packages that aren't available from package.mask
(per-profile)
What language is the script implemented in?
The current script is actually 2
Steve Long wrote:
.. The one
disadvantage to my design is it needs infra. It needs it's own
repository and rsync.
What does that entail? Would a co-located server suffice?
(If it gets popular, I'd imagine those mirroring current rsyncs etc would
want to mirror the releases as well.)
On
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> I have a script which already does several things:
>
> #1. grabs "best_visible" for stable on each arch
> #2. repeat for each SLOT
> #3. purge unnecessary files from FILESDIR
> #4. strip to only "stable" profiles from profiles.desc
> #5. purge unnecessary USE from use.lo
18 matches
Mail list logo
