Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo identification in Primary Volume Descriptor of ISOs

On 5/3/24 4:43 AM, Michal Prívozník wrote: > Awesome! Thank you. > > And speaking of things that slip our attention. When trying to get a > link to this e-mail thread I've noticed at least gentoo-dev archives on > archives.gentoo.org are stuck in 2023: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo identification in Primary Volume Descriptor of ISOs

On 5/2/24 22:48, Ben Kohler wrote: > > On 5/2/24 06:15, Michal Prívozník wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've noticed (thanks to an issue reported against Libvirt [1]), that >> neither minimal installation ISO nor liveGUI ISO contain anything inside >> their Primary Volume Descriptors that would hint the ISO

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo identification in Primary Volume Descriptor of ISOs

On 5/2/24 06:15, Michal Prívozník wrote: Hi, I've noticed (thanks to an issue reported against Libvirt [1]), that neither minimal installation ISO nor liveGUI ISO contain anything inside their Primary Volume Descriptors that would hint the ISO contains Gentoo. This is unfortunate a bit,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo - Google Summer of Code (GSoC)

Dear Yury, Yury German writes: > I am trying to follow up and see if anyone is interested in becoming a > mentor. > > This is the last request I am sending as so far we only have two > people willing to mentor and it is project dependent. > > Do we have any other volunteers as I want to make

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo - Google Summer of Code (GSoC)

On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 08:33:35AM -0500, Yury German wrote: > 2. Mentors.- Last year we got four slots allocated to us by Google and > ran a successful project, we are looking for mentors to be able to > help mentor the applicants, and run the projects. Yes, I'm willing to help mentor. I've

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo - Google Summer of Code (GSoC)

On Sat, Feb 4, 2023, 18:10 Yury German wrote: > Hello All, > > I am trying to follow up and see if anyone is interested in becoming a > mentor. > > This is the last request I am sending as so far we only have two people > willing to mentor and it is project dependent. > > Do we have any other

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo - Google Summer of Code (GSoC)

Hello All, I am trying to follow up and see if anyone is interested in becoming a mentor. This is the last request I am sending as so far we only have two people willing to mentor and it is project dependent. Do we have any other volunteers as I want to make sure that we have a few mentors

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo - Google Summer of Code (GSoC)

On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 5:33 AM Yury German wrote: > > Hello All, > > The registration period for Google Summer of Code is coming up soon. To > continue on with running Gentoo Summer of Code we need some assistance with > the project. > > The following roles are needed: > > 1. Admin Role - To

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

On 05/01/2023 12:09, m1027 wrote: frederik.pfautsch: > >>> So, ideally, there is c): In a hypothetic case we would prepare a >>> entire OS incl. our app (maybe via catalyst?) which would require >>> a bootloader-like mini-OS on the customer's side, to receive >>> updates over the internet,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

frederik.pfautsch: > > So, ideally, there is c): In a hypothetic case we would prepare > > a entire OS incl. our app (maybe via catalyst?) which would > > require a bootloader-like mini-OS on the customer's side, to > > receive updates over the internet, switch the OS at boot time, > > and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

peter: > > Whenever we need to deliver a updated app to customers whose OS is > > too old (but updating it is too risky), we could either > > a) keep evenly outdated dev build OSes around forever (oh no!), or > > b) post our newly built app in a container (leaving the lovely native > > world);

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

m1027 wrote: > Wow, wasn't aware of catalyst at all. What a beast in terms of control. It's not so well-known maybe because it was created by and for gentoo-releng but if you know what you want it's a fantastic tool. > (FYI: I enjoyed the links on catalyst you sent me directly. > Unfortunatelly

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

Hi, On Mon 02 Jan 2023 23:31:17 GMT, m1027 wrote: > I am not complaining here. Hey, we are on rolling release. Some of > you may even know individual solutions to work around each of it. > However, we just may get into trouble when distributing newly > compiled apps (on new Gentoo systems) to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

Am 04.01.23 um 23:00 schrieb m1027: Wow, wasn't aware of catalyst at all. What a beast in terms of control. (FYI: I enjoyed the links on catalyst you sent me directly. Unfortunatelly I cannot answer you directly due to the default TLS guarantee kicked in by my provider: "TLS is required, but

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

peter: > Peter Stuge wrote: > > Essentially you will be maintaining a private fork of gentoo.git, > > If this seems too heavy handed then you can just as well do the reverse: > > Maintain an overlay repo with the packages you care to control in the > state you care to have them, set that in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 4:55 PM m1027 wrote: > > Many thanks for your detailed thoughs for sharing the rich > experiences on this! See below: > > antarus: > > > On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 4:48 AM m1027 wrote: > > > > > > Hi and happy new year. > > > > > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

Many thanks for your detailed thoughs for sharing the rich experiences on this! See below: antarus: > On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 4:48 AM m1027 wrote: > > > > Hi and happy new year. > > > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become easily incompatible for > > older Gentoo systems in production where

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

sam: > > On 2 Jan 2023, at 12:48, m1027 wrote: > > > > Hi and happy new year. > > > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become easily incompatible for > > older Gentoo systems in production where unattended remote world > > updates are risky. This is due to new glibc, openssl-3 etc. [...] >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 4:48 AM m1027 wrote: > > Hi and happy new year. > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become easily incompatible for > older Gentoo systems in production where unattended remote world > updates are risky. This is due to new glibc, openssl-3 etc. I wrote a very long reply,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

Peter Stuge wrote: > Essentially you will be maintaining a private fork of gentoo.git, If this seems too heavy handed then you can just as well do the reverse: Maintain an overlay repo with the packages you care to control in the state you care to have them, set that in the catalyst stage4.spec

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

Hi, m1027 wrote: > So, what we've thought of so far is: > > (1) Keeping outdated developer boxes around and compile there. We > would freeze portage against accidental emerge sync by creating a > git branch in /var/db/repos/gentoo. This feels hacky and requires a > increating number of develper

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

> On 2 Jan 2023, at 12:48, m1027 wrote: > > Hi and happy new year. > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become easily incompatible for > older Gentoo systems in production where unattended remote world > updates are risky. This is due to new glibc, openssl-3 etc. > > So, what we've thought

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

On Mon, 2023-01-02 at 12:48 +, m1027 wrote: > Hi and happy new year. > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become easily incompatible for > older Gentoo systems in production where unattended remote world > updates are risky. This is due to new glibc, openssl-3 etc. > Just update them.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LTS or: proper backward compatibility?

On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 7:48 AM m1027 wrote: > > When we create apps on Gentoo they become easily incompatible for > older Gentoo systems in production where unattended remote world > updates are risky. This is due to new glibc, openssl-3 etc. So, unless you're proposing some improvement this

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

On Fri, 2022-02-11 at 00:36 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > 6. Work on setting up and configuring a buildbot for Gentoo LLVM builds. > This is some effort and I don't have the time to learn how to do that. > You'll probably need to set up a local instance and figure out how to > set our builds

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

Michał Górny writes: >> > 6. Work on setting up and configuring a buildbot for Gentoo LLVM builds. >> > This is some effort and I don't have the time to learn how to do that. >> > You'll probably need to set up a local instance and figure out how to >> > set our builds before submitting

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:11:51PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > GSOC-worthy project? > Not sure. To rephrase what was once said to me, this is summer of > *code*, not infra work. Are there similar programs where the infra work might fit? Outreachy? paid interns? -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

On Fri, 2022-02-11 at 21:19 +0200, Joonas Niilola wrote: > On 11.2.2022 1.36, Michał Górny wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As you may have noticed, I'm practically maintaining LLVM all by myself. > > This is a really tedious, time consuming and ungrateful task, and I'm > > pretty close to burnout. I'd

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

On 11.2.2022 1.36, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, > > As you may have noticed, I'm practically maintaining LLVM all by myself. > This is a really tedious, time consuming and ungrateful task, and I'm > pretty close to burnout. I'd really appreciate some help. > > The problem with LLVM that it's a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

On Fri, 2022-02-11 at 09:40 -0800, A Schenck wrote: > On 2/10/22 15:36, Michał Górny wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As you may have noticed, I'm practically maintaining LLVM all by myself. > > This is a really tedious, time consuming and ungrateful task, and I'm > > pretty close to burnout. I'd really

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo LLVM project needs help!

On 2/10/22 15:36, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, > > As you may have noticed, I'm practically maintaining LLVM all by myself. > This is a really tedious, time consuming and ungrateful task, and I'm > pretty close to burnout. I'd really appreciate some help. > > The problem with LLVM that it's a really

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

Great idea and happy anniversary! :) Roy Bamford wrote: > Here's where I reed your help. I can't help with that. Roy Bamford wrote: > I have a similar media problem with a pile of 5 1/4" floppies. A have a > drive that reads all the 5 1/4" formats and a motherboard to connect it > to ...

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

On 20/04/2021 06:31, Robin H. Johnson wrote: Here's two I have so far https://dev.gentoo.org/~robbat2/neddy/ On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:24:41AM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote: Here's where I reed your help. The missing distfiles are MD5 38adc94a4953a6b29e8619c25dda4887 4.2.0-4.2.1.diff.gz 54763 MD5

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

Here's two I have so far https://dev.gentoo.org/~robbat2/neddy/ On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:24:41AM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote: > Here's where I reed your help. The missing distfiles are > MD5 38adc94a4953a6b29e8619c25dda4887 4.2.0-4.2.1.diff.gz 54763 > MD5 d5cc6a93c7d3ad2eb02bc637a1de9cf3

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

On 20/4/21 4:14 am, Philip Webb wrote: > 210419 Roy Bamford wrote: >> Its my 18th anniversary of installing Gentoo. > You beat me by 6 mth . I had recently built my 2nd machine > & had been using Mandrake in the 1st, but they were slow with their release. > I tried Suse + Slackware, but

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

210419 Roy Bamford wrote: > Its my 18th anniversary of installing Gentoo. You beat me by 6 mth . I had recently built my 2nd machine & had been using Mandrake in the 1st, but they were slow with their release. I tried Suse + Slackware, but couldn't get them set up properly, so I thought I might

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

On 19/04/2021 15:55, Benda Xu wrote: Roy, Roy Bamford writes: Its my 18th anniversary of installing Gentoo. A number of coincidences gave rise to my original liveCD turning up when I was searching for bits to get an old system to boot just one more time to get some forgotten data off its

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 18th Anniversary Edition - Help Needed

Roy, Roy Bamford writes: > Its my 18th anniversary of installing Gentoo. A number of coincidences gave > rise to > my original liveCD turning up when I was searching for bits to get an old > system to boot > just one more time to get some forgotten data off its hard drives. I just had > to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Foundations Trustee Election 2020 - Election Team Formation

On 2020.06.17 10:40, David Abbott wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:08 AM Roy Bamford > wrote: > > > > Team, > > > > Its time to kick off the Trustee Election for this year. > > > > It will span June 21 to about August 3. > > We need two or three election officials and an infra contact to >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Foundations Trustee Election 2020 - Election Team Formation

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:08 AM Roy Bamford wrote: > > Team, > > Its time to kick off the Trustee Election for this year. > > It will span June 21 to about August 3. > We need two or three election officials and an infra contact to staff this > election. > > If you will be available and have a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo/OpenBSD current status

On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 23:54:44 + (UTC) "Thomas Mueller" wrote: > > Benda Xu wrote: > > > > I was wondering if the openbsd prefix support is something > > > > that is still garnering any interest from gentoo? > > > > There is still interest in Gentoo. But no one seems to have energy to >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo/OpenBSD current status

> Benda Xu wrote: > > > I was wondering if the openbsd prefix support is something > > > that is still garnering any interest from gentoo? > > There is still interest in Gentoo. But no one seems to have energy to > > take care of it. > FWIW I have interest in this as well. > > Your

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo/OpenBSD current status

On 6/1/20 4:19 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: > Benda Xu wrote: >>> I was wondering if the openbsd prefix support is something >>> that is still garnering any interest from gentoo? >> >> There is still interest in Gentoo. But no one seems to have energy to >> take care of it. > > FWIW I have interest in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo/OpenBSD current status

Benda Xu wrote: > > I was wondering if the openbsd prefix support is something > > that is still garnering any interest from gentoo? > > There is still interest in Gentoo. But no one seems to have energy to > take care of it. FWIW I have interest in this as well. > Your contribution is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo/OpenBSD current status

Aisha Tammy writes: > I've been trying to play around with the prefix and reading the > code. Basically trying to get it to work for my system. I've not > managed to get even a small headstart and am quite lost to say the > least. I was wondering if the openbsd prefix support is something >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Election 2020 - Call For Election Officials

On 2020.05.30 13:14, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 6:09 AM Roy Bamford > wrote: > > > > We sill need more volunteers. > > > > Not going to be running, so I'm happy to pitch in. > > -- > Rich > > > Rich, Thank you. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Election 2020 - Call For Election Officials

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 6:09 AM Roy Bamford wrote: > > We sill need more volunteers. > Not going to be running, so I'm happy to pitch in. -- Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Election 2020 - Call For Election Officials

On 2020.05.29 21:10, David Abbott wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:03 PM Roy Bamford > wrote: > > > > Team, > > > > Our current council will hold their last meeting on 14-Jun-20. > > We therefore need to elect a new council before the July meeting. > > > > To do this, I'm calling for three

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Election 2020 - Call For Election Officials

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 4:03 PM Roy Bamford wrote: > > Team, > > Our current council will hold their last meeting on 14-Jun-20. > We therefore need to elect a new council before the July meeting. > > To do this, I'm calling for three volunteers to be election officials and an > infra member to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo clang team

Hi Sam, Thanks for your reply I've seen project LLVM but I was concerned it is about porting LLVM to Gentoo, not about making Gentoo LLVM/Clang - compatible. There even was no such thing in their TODO list. Anyway, thanks. I'll try reach them. вт, 12 мая 2020 г. в 15:51, Sam James : > > On 12

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo clang team

> On 12 May 2020, at 14:48, Alexander Bilyak wrote: > > Hello everyone in this mailing list. > > I apologize for myself as I am not sure if it is the right place to write, > but anyway... > I am the (only) maintainer of gentoo-clang > overlay. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [gentoo-java][PR] ivy, mvn, sbt, gradle builders improvement for ebuild development

Hi Benda, I'm sorry, but maybe I miss something after reading the documentation... I only check java and ant build system. My point is about other JVM languages such as scala, groovy, kotlin, clojure, ... And about builders such as gradle or sbt? I think that eclasses for those would be very

Re: [gentoo-dev] [gentoo-java][PR] ivy, mvn, sbt, gradle builders improvement for ebuild development

Hi Samuel, Samuel Bernardo writes: > I send this email to mention that it seems to be missing eclasses for > JVM builders such as those I mention in this email subject. Dependencies > and tasks management are hard tasks now that I think to have great scope > for improvement. Have you read the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-CI can now filter on maintainers (also verbose output)

Dnia July 26, 2019 5:17:31 AM UTC, Georgy Yakovlev napisał(a): >On Thursday, July 25, 2019 7:05:16 AM PDT Michał Górny wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Just a quick bit of news on gentoo-ci. >> >> Firstly, I've implemented support for quiet/verbose reports. So now >> the default report seen at [1] is not

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-CI can now filter on maintainers (also verbose output)

On Thursday, July 25, 2019 7:05:16 AM PDT Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, > > Just a quick bit of news on gentoo-ci. > > Firstly, I've implemented support for quiet/verbose reports. So now > the default report seen at [1] is not that huge, and if somebody wants > all the details at [2]. > This is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-CI can now filter on maintainers (also verbose output)

On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:05:16 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > Thirdly, I've implemented filtering by maintainer. > > To get reports for developer foo, append ';maintainer=foo', e.g.: Thanks very much :). This will come in *very* handy for me :) pgp_LVJov6dDk.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 19-04-30 13:43:31, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 1:22 PM Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > > > It matters if things are perceived as official Gentoo and causing a > > negative reputation as in the article in this thread. One some level > > that actually goes to trademark

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 19-04-30 17:36:46, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:24:45PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-04-30 at 19:20 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > > On 4/30/19 7:18 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 1:22 PM Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > It matters if things are perceived as official Gentoo and causing a > negative reputation as in the article in this thread. One some level > that actually goes to trademark infringement that should be of interest > to the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 7:32 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: > One thing that may help is to have multiple levels of control defined. Indeed, this distinction is interesting. -- Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 07:24:45PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > On Tue, 2019-04-30 at 19:20 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > On 4/30/19 7:18 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 7:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> I've contacted the author and the author refused to change it. >>> The claim is that 'PR team runs it', '8 Gentoo developers have admin >>> rights', 'i.e. it is sanctioned by the project itself'. I was suggested >>> that if it's not official, we should

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 19-04-30 19:24:45, Michał Górny wrote: > On Tue, 2019-04-30 at 19:20 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > On 4/30/19 7:18 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > > > > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Tue, 2019-04-30 at 19:20 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 4/30/19 7:18 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 7:17 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:34 PM Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > >> In this article on chat services used for OSS: >> >> https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ >> >> I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 7:18 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: >> In this article on chat services used for OSS: >> >> https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ >> >> I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ > > I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that uses "Discord > as an official method of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:34 PM Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ > > I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that uses "Discord > as an official method of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 6:55 PM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > Probably what it is - social media under PR admin. Do you > consider facebook as official communication medium too? No, Facebook is definitely not an official communication medium. However you might argue that a given Facebook Page is official if it is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

Ühel kenal päeval, T, 30.04.2019 kell 18:17, kirjutas Kristian Fiskerstrand: > On 4/30/19 6:04 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > On 4/30/19 9:05 AM, Cynede wrote: > > > Right, alike reddit, twitter, facebook and other PR channels. > > > It's > > > "official" because it's controlled by PR Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 6:04 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 4/30/19 9:05 AM, Cynede wrote: >> Right, alike reddit, twitter, facebook and other PR channels. It's >> "official" because it's controlled by PR Gentoo team, > > No, that does not make anything official. Official would mean a place we > would

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 4/30/19 9:05 AM, Cynede wrote: > Right, alike reddit, twitter, facebook and other PR channels. It's > "official" because it's controlled by PR Gentoo team, No, that does not make anything official. Official would mean a place we would place an announcement ourselves and mostly comes down to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 23:23 -0400, desultory wrote: > On 04/29/19 17:04, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:34 PM Dirkjan Ochtman > > wrote: > > > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > > > > > https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 22:34 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ > > I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that uses "Discord > as an official method of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On 04/29/19 17:04, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:34 PM Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: >> >> In this article on chat services used for OSS: >> >> https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ >> >> I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:34 PM Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > In this article on chat services used for OSS: > > https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ > > I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that uses "Discord as > an official method of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

Hi! On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 09:08:06 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:26 AM Ben Kohler wrote: > > > > 1) Adjust x86 profile defaults to drop the problematic -march=i686. > > This would be more in line with amd64 profiles (et al), which set no > > -march value so it can run on

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 10:13:42 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > I think an exp arch is also overkill. How many packages simply can't > be built for i486? I think a profile+masking makes a lot more sense > than an entire new level of QA that touches every ebuild in the tree > because there might be a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:57 AM Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:19 AM Kent Fredric wrote: > > > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:26:24 -0500 > > Ben Kohler wrote: > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Is there a good reason we can't have a legacy profile for this? > > > > Or perhaps, a new

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:19 AM Kent Fredric wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:26:24 -0500 > Ben Kohler wrote: > > > Thoughts? > > Is there a good reason we can't have a legacy profile for this? > > Or perhaps, a new (exp) arch entirely dedicated to legacy x86? Sounds like a lot of work for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:26:24 -0500 Ben Kohler wrote: > Thoughts? Is there a good reason we can't have a legacy profile for this? Or perhaps, a new (exp) arch entirely dedicated to legacy x86? The latter would be ideal for ensuring everything we *claim* works on i486 does indeed work there,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:27 PM R0b0t1 wrote: > > Even newer embedded i586 and i686 hardware isn't cost effective > considering power consumption. When considering power it often does > not even make sense to run donated hardware ~5 years old. > I was referring to running the x86 arch on

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:08 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > 1. Museum hardware. People have systems that are running simply > BECAUSE they are old, not because they are cost-effective/etc. I'm > not sure I'd even lump used hardware into this category any longer, as > I'm sure there are plenty of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On 08/22/2018 08:26 AM, Ben Kohler wrote: > Hi guys, > > For some time now, we've been shipping broken i486 stage3s that do not > run on pre-i686 hardware [1].  Due to a change in catalyst [2], we no > longer set CXXFLAGS in the default make.conf, so the x86 profiles' (imho > wrong/broken)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On 22/08/18 20:20, Matt Turner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:26 AM Ben Kohler wrote: >> 2) Patch catalyst to start setting CXXFLAGS again. Rather than roll >> back to exactly CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}" again, it's been suggested that we >> start setting COMMON_FLAGS, and CFLAGS="${COMMON_FLAGS}"

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:26 AM Ben Kohler wrote: > 2) Patch catalyst to start setting CXXFLAGS again. Rather than roll > back to exactly CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}" again, it's been suggested that we > start setting COMMON_FLAGS, and CFLAGS="${COMMON_FLAGS}" > CXXFLAGS=${COMMON_FLAGS}" etc. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On 2018-08-22 16:30, Mike Gilbert wrote: > So +1 from me on removing -march=i686 from the x86 arch profile. +1 -- Regards, Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:26 AM Ben Kohler wrote: > > Hi guys, > > For some time now, we've been shipping broken i486 stage3s that do not > run on pre-i686 hardware [1]. Due to a change in catalyst [2], we no > longer set CXXFLAGS in the default make.conf, so the x86 profiles' (imho >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

Rich Freeman wrote: > Is there a large population that actually runs x86 on modern > hardware, or is ancient hardware a significant use case? There are current products with pre-686 instruction sets. Companies such as DM still produce 586-class SoCs for embedded and industrial. These[1][2] are

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

Ühel kenal päeval, K, 22.08.2018 kell 09:08, kirjutas Rich Freeman: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:26 AM Ben Kohler > wrote: > > > > 1) Adjust x86 profile defaults to drop the problematic -march=i686. > > This would be more in line with amd64 profiles (et al), which set > > no > > -march value so

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 07:26:24 -0500 Ben Kohler wrote: > For some time now, we've been shipping broken i486 stage3s that do > not run on pre-i686 hardware [1]. Due to a change in catalyst [2], > we no longer set CXXFLAGS in the default make.conf, so the x86 > profiles' (imho wrong/broken)

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:26 AM Ben Kohler wrote: > > 1) Adjust x86 profile defaults to drop the problematic -march=i686. > This would be more in line with amd64 profiles (et al), which set no > -march value so it can run on any hardware for this arch. > My knee-jerk reaction was that this is a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo QA Scripts

Hi Michael, Michael Mair-Keimberger writes: > Some time ago i presented some scripts which are running daily on my > website to provide some basic QA findings. I wanted to give you a > update on the status of the scripts as many things changed since then. > First of all, gentoo.levelnine.at is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 02:57:19PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: >The whitelist automatically whitelists all @[2]gentoo.org addresses. I think those who have editbugs would also be good candidates for implicit whitelisting as well. -- Sam Jorna GnuPG Key: D6180C26 signature.asc Description:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

On 14/05/2018 07:35, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu nie, 13.05.2018 o godzinie 17∶28 -0400, użytkownik Alec Warner > napisał: >> On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. >> wrote: >>> I'm wondering, >>>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

W dniu nie, 13.05.2018 o godzinie 17∶28 -0400, użytkownik Alec Warner napisał: > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. > wrote: > > > On 13/05/2018 20:57, Alec Warner wrote: > > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/ > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: > On 13/05/2018 20:57, Alec Warner wrote: > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/ > > Mailing_Lists#Managing_the_Gentoo-Dev_whitelist > > I'm wondering, >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

On 13/05/2018 20:57, Alec Warner wrote: > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/ > Mailing_Lists#Managing_the_Gentoo-Dev_whitelist I'm wondering, currently says for me "No repositories found". Am I using a wrong address, or

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

I think that for not official gentoo dev and proxy maint team list could be build from bug.gentoo.org issue list that are open. I try to contact proxy maint team. Ty for reply. G. On Sun, May 13, 2018, 21:38 Alec Warner wrote: > > > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Geaaru

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-dev whitelisting

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Geaaru wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not a gentoo dev but currently I have an official issue to > bugs.gentoo.org as proxy ebuild maintainer for same packages. > Contact proxy-ma...@gentoo.org and ask that they sponsor you. We may want to consider just

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >