Re: [gentoo-dev] Another call for BugVoting on bugs.gentoo.org
On 5/17/05, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 16 May 2005 08:01 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2005 19:45:05 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Monday 16 May 2005 07:08 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | What, so that you can see which bugs a small but vocal group of | ricers are interested in rather than the ones that're actually | important? | | once again, voting is optional ... if you dont want to pay attention | to them, then dont I would tend to agree with Klieber when he closed the actual bug about this issue that I read through a few weeks ago. The problem with leaving it optional being users vote a bunch on bug X and then the developer says he doesn't care, and then the users bitch because 'their precious voice was ignored'. Personally if users want crap that bad, they can submit the code themselves. Do you see such kind of bitching anywhere in the kde project? On the bugs where I looked I dont see anything, seems like people know that voting wont count as a means of pressure for developers. Most if not all of the developers here are volunteers, and just because a bunch of users vote up a bug doesn't particularly make it important to Many bugs in bugzilla have ebuilds contributed, the work is done, there is just no developer to add them to the tree and review them. Bugvoting would allow other developers to see where they can help. For example I am using kde but dont read all kde bugs, so if I would know there is a kde bug with many votes I would maybe look at it. work on. I think that if this is made clear enough somewhere, them this could work. Obviously voting is a very nice tool that could help out a lot of people who use it. It's just not worth it (IMHO) when it annoys the other half of the people who don't use it. We can alternatively introduce a customilzable Bugzilla, developers who dont want to see Votes can turn them off and will not see the Vote counts for bugs :) -- Stefan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Another call for BugVoting on bugs.gentoo.org
Stefan Schweizer wrote: Many bugs in bugzilla have ebuilds contributed, the work is done, there is just no developer to add them to the tree and review them. Bugvoting would allow other developers to see where they can help. For example I am using kde but dont read all kde bugs, so if I would know there is a kde bug with many votes I would maybe look at it. I have mixed feelings about this. Voting would be useful to judge which package gathers sufficient popularity to be added to Portage for example. Currently only packages a developer cares for are added, voting would help to get user opinion. On the other hand, on base system bugs for example voting would be more a pressure tool that might not help much... We could enable voting on a New Ebuilds section and see how it goes ? -- Koon -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Another call for BugVoting on bugs.gentoo.org
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 09:58:43AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: Stefan Schweizer wrote: Many bugs in bugzilla have ebuilds contributed, the work is done, there is just no developer to add them to the tree and review them. Bugvoting would allow other developers to see where they can help. For example I am using kde but dont read all kde bugs, so if I would know there is a kde bug with many votes I would maybe look at it. I have mixed feelings about this. Voting would be useful to judge which package gathers sufficient popularity to be added to Portage for example. Currently only packages a developer cares for are added, voting would help to get user opinion. On the other hand, on base system bugs for example voting would be more a pressure tool that might not help much... We could enable voting on a New Ebuilds section and see how it goes ? Seems like a good approach in my opinion. Most of the nays have basically come down to I don't want people voting on stuff I'm working on, I know what needs to be done, don't need extra input to discern it. Ebuild submissions fall squarely outside of that arguement, and would be a good test run of it. Personally, I'd be interested in it for actual portage bugs; that said, I'm not totally sure if I'd want it enabled _now_ since there are internal changes needed rather then more feature bloat, so voting would be ignored till internal bits are done. My 2 cents... ~harring -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Another call for BugVoting on bugs.gentoo.org
On 5/16/05, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 16 May 2005 19:45:05 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | On Monday 16 May 2005 07:08 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | What, so that you can see which bugs a small but vocal group of | ricers are interested in rather than the ones that're actually | important? | | once again, voting is optional ... if you dont want to pay attention | to them, then dont I would tend to agree with Klieber when he closed the actual bug about this issue that I read through a few weeks ago. The problem with leaving it optional being users vote a bunch on bug X and then the developer says he doesn't care, and then the users bitch because 'their precious voice was ignored'. They manage to do that pretty well already. Most if not all of the developers here are volunteers, and just because a bunch of users vote up a bug doesn't particularly make it important to work on. Agreed, but it can give a good indication of the bugs that a lot of users are running into. Right now that's handled by swarms of me too posts (and last time i checked, those couldn't be filtered by procmail too effectively either. ;]). Not saying those posts will disappear of course, just pointing out that it might not be a creation of another source of generally unwanted feedback, but a way to move this already existing feedback into a less annoying form. Mozilla is another good example of a bugzilla using a voting system with positive results (and they even have windows users ;]). But they also use the confirmed status and discourage 'me too' posts in favor of the vote system, which is something that might not work for Gentoo. --de. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
iawww, i thought that added extra emphasis to the post history... ;) On Monday 16 May 2005 08:41 pm, Jeffrey Forman wrote: Good eye, Fixed! -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 09:25 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote: Something's wrong with the i tags -- the one before Additional is never closed. span class=bz_comment --- iAdditional Comment a name=c2 href=#c2#2/a From !-- JSF - unfangled all the emails, so they are spam spider unfriendly -- iBrandon Low/i 2002-03-07 15:57 PDT --- /span Thus all comments show up as italic. -- -o()o- Michael Cummings |#gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl Gentoo Perl Dev|on irc.freenode.net -o()o- pgpKhAYRVQffU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Subversion and Apache 2.0.54
On Friday 13 May 2005 19:04, Ian Brandt wrote: Paul de Vrieze wrote: Quite likely you changed db versions along the run. While this theoretically should work. The best course of action is to dump the repository. Make sure you have a consistent use of db, and load the repository. Alternatively you could try to use fs_fs Eventually I was able to get a dump by compiling 1.1.4 myself using all the dependencies included in the source with the exception of db-4.1.25_p1-r4. In principle the 1.0 apr's and later should work for subversion. The main versions are still the 0.9.x versions though. These are the ones I use. These database errors are normally not related to the apache version. (apr/apr-util can be related though). I was able to get the 1.1.4 ebuild to work but only with apache-2.0.52-r3, apr-0.9.5-r3, and apr-util-0.9.5. All my attempts to merge 1.1.4 or 1.1.3 and apache-2.0.53/54 (which use apr 0.9.6) resulted in the same failing svn binaries. With the working apache-2.0.52 and subversion-1.1.4 combination I dropped the repository, recreated as fsfs, and successfully loaded the dump I made with my own compile of 1.1.4. It's been running fine since. You could change the useflag to not include berkeley db. On my system things work with apr(-util)-0.96, apache-2.0.54-r5 and subversion-1.1.4. What I should note though is that my apache does not have ldap support compiled in. It could very well be that ldap is causing your troubles. Which db version is your ldap compiled against? Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgp94MgGQMFyL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [ANNOUNCE] eclectic-0.9.1
On Monday 09 May 2005 03:00, Marius Mauch wrote: Just put it as a subproject under base as it doesn't have the substance for a TLP, and I don't think azarah would mind it ;) It should be under the tools project. This is clearly a tool. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net pgpWDSAkWe0An.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan Smith wrote: I noticed a bug [1] which, when resolved after the upgrade, did not list the cause of resolution (in this case, it was a dup). Is this no longer required? I rather liked that feature, as it enabled people to see, at a quick glance, the final status of the bug... [1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92861 smithj, the bug showed that information for me: Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92861 Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92861 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added - Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-17 01:46 PDT - --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 12745 *** Here it is, the last row. - -- Alin DOBRE Romanian Lead Translator Gentoo Documentation Project: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ Gentoo.RO Community: http://www.gentoo.ro/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCievUmG51ym6Hu9gRAqRTAKCB3yMPL3wxtKN0khWG2omYvVni1ACg1uEK JDERrmlt3ojv78yNkOAs8dA= =5TVL -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
On 5/17/05, Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MySQL-4.1.12 is in the tree (hard-masked), and I would like lots of early testing. MySQL-4.0.24-r2 is also in the tree (hard-masked) for testing, and contains some of the improvements in the 4.1 ebuilds, like the new pkg_config, and the updated init.d script. I'd be happy to give 4.1.x some testing on one of my servers - I'm planning on reinstalling at some point in the near future (probably this weekend). Is there anything specific that needs testing, or should I just drop it in as a replacement for whatever version of 4.0 I'm running and see if it breaks anything? Paul -- Rogue Tory http://www.roguetory.org.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
maillog: 17/05/2005-16:04:20(+0300): Alin Dobre types -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan Smith wrote: I noticed a bug [1] which, when resolved after the upgrade, did not list the cause of resolution (in this case, it was a dup). Is this no longer required? I rather liked that feature, as it enabled people to see, at a quick glance, the final status of the bug... [1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92861 smithj, the bug showed that information for me: Clear-Text: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92861 Secure: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92861 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added - Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-17 01:46 PDT - --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 12745 *** Here it is, the last row. But in the headers it says: Status: RESOLVED Resolution: -- -* Georgi Georgiev -* Humor in th Court: Q: Do you drink when -* *-[EMAIL PROTECTED]*- you're on duty? A: I don't drink when I'm*- -* +81(90)2877-8845 -* on duty, unless I come on duty drunk.-* -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
Lance Albertson wrote: Robin H. Johnson wrote: Many thanks to Francesco Riosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] for his hard work in dealing with MySQL-4.1. He's joining Gentoo soon as a new developer to help maintain MySQL for the 4.1 and 5.0 series, and hopefully also providing a package for the official MySQL AB binaries. Great work! I used his 4.1.11 ebuild recently and everything seems to work pretty well. I'll see if I can try the 4.1.12 ebuild soon. Upgrades within the 4.1.x series shouldn't be painful right? Cheers, Thanks to Robin before, he has guided me and solved issues that have been there for month before. That sayd, never ever emerge sync has been happier for me, and also have the mail filled of closed bug reports isn't that bad ;) To answer you Lance, yes upgrading from a version best than 4.1.4 should be straight, with 4.1.0 .. 4.1.4 better consider to unload to be on the safe side. Francesco -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
Paul Waring wrote: On 5/17/05, Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MySQL-4.1.12 is in the tree (hard-masked), and I would like lots of early testing. MySQL-4.0.24-r2 is also in the tree (hard-masked) for testing, and contains some of the improvements in the 4.1 ebuilds, like the new pkg_config, and the updated init.d script. I'd be happy to give 4.1.x some testing on one of my servers - I'm planning on reinstalling at some point in the near future (probably this weekend). Is there anything specific that needs testing, or should I just drop it in as a replacement for whatever version of 4.0 I'm running and see if it breaks anything? Paul Don't know if robbat2 need other testings but here it has been tested only on x86, at the moment there are no other archs avaiable for testing. On all the builds of theese latest months the most fragile stuff has been use flag interaction and client library, so if you don't need say geometry or cluster unset this use, because here it has been tested with pratically all up. Another thing that can need reviev is the support file that the ebuild install (/usr/share/mysql) do you need something more, something different? Francesco -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan Smith wrote: Georgi Georgiev wrote: maillog: 17/05/2005-16:04:20(+0300): Alin Dobre types *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 12745 *** Here it is, the last row. But in the headers it says: Status: RESOLVED Resolution: right. what i was saying was that it is very nice to see the reason for resolution in the summary section. something like this: What|Removed |Added - Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE yes, indeed, the Resolution is empty, now. - -- Alin DOBRE Romanian Lead Translator Gentoo Documentation Project: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ Gentoo.RO Community: http://www.gentoo.ro/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCifotmG51ym6Hu9gRAiYbAJ9FHjkNFnQxJhN9KHCxHT8mAaAQvwCfQsD0 Tr8LMuYW3M/X1CQflOgH9+s= =xT1h -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] More bashrc usage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
While I was waiting for a package to compile, I worked on a new bashrc
some. You can get the bashrc file from here:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/bashrc
to which you can stick it in /etc/portage/ if you want to use it.
two main things it includes are pathchk and whatis FEATURES. Pathchk is
used to check for POSIX compatibility in file naming. This can be
helpful when trying to see how POSIX compatible your packages are. This
includes (taken from info page):
1. one of the existing directories in NAME does not have search
(execute) permission,
2. the length of NAME is larger than its filesystem's maximum file
name length,
3. the length of one component of NAME, corresponding to an existing
directory name, is larger than its filesystem's maximum length for
a file name component.
I really hope #1 doesn't come up on your package.. because that would
really not be a Good Thing(tm) #2 and #3 is probably what you're after.
Note that this program seems to be pretty strict (14 characters max
filenames to work on ALL POSIX systems). The bashrc file simply
recurses the source directory, pathchk-ing every file and putting the
results in ${PATHCHECK_LOG_DIR}/pathcheck.log (which is set to
/var/log/pathcheck by defualt).
the whatis FEATURE will update the whatis database when you're done
installing a package. This is helpful for keeping it up to date. If
you haven't updated the whatis database in awhile, it could take a
_long_time_. After that it's not really that bad and shouldn't take but
a minute or so (depends on system) to get the update finished.
This is something I slapped together late at night, so don't expect the
world, cause I'm not going to give it to you (...yet /me takes out world
domination plans).
Chris White
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCiftjFdQwWVoAgN4RAvbgAJ9nF/amQlbrkofAVXUthK0Pc4FA0QCgow96
UBnzr7L7uUYVGw7TthJBuFU=
=mkR3
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeffrey Forman wrote: [snip] Anything else I've forgotten, I will happily take full credit for. [snip] one more thing: comment #15 of bug 92622 [1] shows the bug which was a dup as marked through. perhaps this is intentional (resolved bugs show this attribute?), but it is very annoying, and it makes it hard to see the bug number without clicking on it to go to the link. sorry for the deluge of posts. overall, though, i very much like the new bugzilla, so don't take my comments the wrong way ;-) [1]: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92622#c15 - -smithj -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCifwTl5AvwDPiUowRApkRAJ97dCUnzHTtsTUVDeVMn+Qcx5FRywCgtEF0 St9KDsjnf15mfRUD08MJdDs= =xS1I -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
On 5/17/05, Francesco Riosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't know if robbat2 need other testings but here it has been tested only on x86, at the moment there are no other archs avaiable for testing. If ebuilds exist for PPC (there appears to be one for 4.1.8-r1) then I'll be able to test it on that, assuming I manage to get Gentoo successfully installed on my Powerbook this weekend. I'm afraid I don't have any exotic hardware to test the other architecture builds on. Paul -- Rogue Tory http://www.roguetory.org.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
I've looked at the actual DB behind bugzilla, and that seems to be the only bug having that such situation, with a resolved-like status, but no resolution, all the other bugs look fine. *shrug* -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 17:05 +0300, Alin Dobre wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan Smith wrote: Georgi Georgiev wrote: maillog: 17/05/2005-16:04:20(+0300): Alin Dobre types *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 12745 *** Here it is, the last row. But in the headers it says: Status: RESOLVED Resolution: right. what i was saying was that it is very nice to see the reason for resolution in the summary section. something like this: What|Removed |Added - Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE yes, indeed, the Resolution is empty, now. -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeffrey Forman wrote: That seems odd, then again, those are VERY old bugs. Way before my time of looking at bugzilla to upgrade. Don't think it has anything to do with age. Just marked this one a dup this morning. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92539 - -- Power, n.: The only narcotic regulated by the SEC instead of the FDA. Aaron Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCigtuC3poscuANHARAvAcAKDeyDCkDFbQQgFpYQujD386cNiEjwCdEi5O j7wOcgkhAIesatP2kckZTYo= =5Pz/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
Bingo, I found the correlation between those bugs and the previous ones mentioned by Daniel. They have all been marked as duplicates of other bugs. Therefore bugzilla does not put a resolution in there, only marking them as status: resolved. -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 11:19 -0400, Aaron Walker wrote: Jeffrey Forman wrote: That seems odd, then again, those are VERY old bugs. Way before my time of looking at bugzilla to upgrade. Don't think it has anything to do with age. Just marked this one a dup this morning. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92539 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
I retract my earlier statement. In the upgrade, I forgot to fully copy over all the resolution states. (Don't you just love that comfortable feeling that comes with editing a live system?) Now when a bug is marked as a duplicate it shows up as Status: RESOLVED Resolution: DUPLICATE of bug (some other bug #) Sorry for the confusion, I sit corrected. -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 11:47 -0400, Jeffrey Forman wrote: Bingo, I found the correlation between those bugs and the previous ones mentioned by Daniel. They have all been marked as duplicates of other bugs. Therefore bugzilla does not put a resolution in there, only marking them as status: resolved. -Jeffrey -- Jeffrey Forman Gentoo Infrastructure Gentoo Release Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
(fearing the jeff wrath) can we get the dup status added back in though? i know, i know, we're being nitpicky, and not too many folks have stood up and applauded this effort like they should have (ahem). Just...unsettling to see bugs marked as resolved - make it sound like i did something rather than find that the same problem had been reported a few times :) On Tuesday 17 May 2005 11:47 am, Jeffrey Forman wrote: Bingo, I found the correlation between those bugs and the previous ones mentioned by Daniel. They have all been marked as duplicates of other bugs. Therefore bugzilla does not put a resolution in there, only marking them as status: resolved. -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 11:19 -0400, Aaron Walker wrote: Jeffrey Forman wrote: That seems odd, then again, those are VERY old bugs. Way before my time of looking at bugzilla to upgrade. Don't think it has anything to do with age. Just marked this one a dup this morning. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92539 -- -o()o- Michael Cummings |#gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl Gentoo Perl Dev|on irc.freenode.net -o()o- pgpx5fBJYOfLE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
Michael, You are very welcome, it was a pleasure to upgrade such a critical piece of Gentoo, even though it required time I could have spent outside in the Florida sun. As for your question about adding in the duplicate status. 'Duplicate' isn't a status, its a resolution state. I point you to http://bugs.gentoo.org/page.cgi?id=fields.html#status for a better explanation. So in a more abstract sense, a Duplicate bug has been 'resolved,' as someone has determined that it is a duplicate bug and pointed the bug to its appropriate original filing. With that said, I put this issue to rest. ;) Yes, it's nitpicky, but I won't impart any bodily harm on you. -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 12:42 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote: (fearing the jeff wrath) can we get the dup status added back in though? i know, i know, we're being nitpicky, and not too many folks have stood up and applauded this effort like they should have (ahem). Just...unsettling to see bugs marked as resolved - make it sound like i did something rather than find that the same problem had been reported a few times :) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
yeah, i hit send, then jforman hit send. sorry. On Tuesday 17 May 2005 12:42 pm, Michael Cummings wrote: (fearing the jeff wrath) can we get the dup status added back in though? i know, i know, we're being nitpicky, and not too many folks have stood up and applauded this effort like they should have (ahem). Just...unsettling to see bugs marked as resolved - make it sound like i did something rather than find that the same problem had been reported a few times :) On Tuesday 17 May 2005 11:47 am, Jeffrey Forman wrote: Bingo, I found the correlation between those bugs and the previous ones mentioned by Daniel. They have all been marked as duplicates of other bugs. Therefore bugzilla does not put a resolution in there, only marking them as status: resolved. -Jeffrey On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 11:19 -0400, Aaron Walker wrote: Jeffrey Forman wrote: That seems odd, then again, those are VERY old bugs. Way before my time of looking at bugzilla to upgrade. Don't think it has anything to do with age. Just marked this one a dup this morning. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=92539 -- -o()o- Michael Cummings |#gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl Gentoo Perl Dev|on irc.freenode.net -o()o- pgp15yEBzFG0R.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 02:16:58PM +0100, Paul Waring wrote: On 5/17/05, Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MySQL-4.1.12 is in the tree (hard-masked), and I would like lots of early testing. MySQL-4.0.24-r2 is also in the tree (hard-masked) for testing, and contains some of the improvements in the 4.1 ebuilds, like the new pkg_config, and the updated init.d script. I'd be happy to give 4.1.x some testing on one of my servers - I'm planning on reinstalling at some point in the near future (probably this weekend). Is there anything specific that needs testing, or should I just drop it in as a replacement for whatever version of 4.0 I'm running and see if it breaks anything? Ah, I missed that some arches had ~arched 4.1.8-r1. I've added them to the keywords for 4.1.12, so you should be able to try the latest ebuild now. -- Robin Hugh Johnson E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2 ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639 GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgp612W1OVf90.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] i have an idea ! (erescue)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris Gianelloni wrote: A much better approach would be for there to be a rescue build, completely independent of the stages, since it doesn't need to mirror them in any way. It should be extracted (self-extracted?) to something like /rescue and executed from there, being completely self-contained. This keeps it from stomping on system files and breaking collision-protect or doing anything else nasty like hosing configuration files (ever made the mistake of extracting a stage onto a live filesystem?) when unpacked. This sounds a lot like saying, use an initrd, but when you pivot roots to the live filesystem, leave it mounted somewhere. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCiirqXVaO67S1rtsRAgHyAJ49adhPpYhwHqUeFNMw4I6h+GUyDwCfbwMB rgA0GKbYsBjd8K9I7X2pyE8= =tZSe -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeffrey Forman wrote: You are very welcome, it was a pleasure to upgrade such a critical piece of Gentoo, even though it required time I could have spent outside in the Florida sun. Heh, that explains why I spend so much time working on Gentoo -- this rainy Oregon weather. =) Some of the new features are pretty sweet though, so thanks for doing it! Donnie -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCiiugXVaO67S1rtsRAgbkAKCZmu66b2OkwZUY/MjlXr6elG2zoACfQaMO hkSrMrWa7517hNMgSKxj+5Q= =2tFV -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
Francesco Riosa wrote: Lance Albertson wrote: Robin H. Johnson wrote: Many thanks to Francesco Riosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] for his hard work in dealing with MySQL-4.1. He's joining Gentoo soon as a new developer to help maintain MySQL for the 4.1 and 5.0 series, and hopefully also providing a package for the official MySQL AB binaries. Great work! I used his 4.1.11 ebuild recently and everything seems to work pretty well. I'll see if I can try the 4.1.12 ebuild soon. Upgrades within the 4.1.x series shouldn't be painful right? It's all grate! But how about mysql 5 ? And wath about spliting mysq into mysql-server and mysql-client how it do like in FreeBSD. -- WBR, Alexander Simonov (AS1199-UANIC | DEVL-UANIC) Ukrainian Gentoo Community Domain Coordinator Jabber-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE complete bugs.gentoo.org
Donnie Berkholz wrote: Some of the new features are pretty sweet though, so thanks for doing it! Is it possible to add some feature which will allow end users to change timezone in which the times are reported? Or at least allow UTC? -jkt -- cd /local/pub more beer /dev/mouth signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] mysql-4.1.12 call for testers
On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 05:40:25PM +, Alexander Simonov wrote: It's all grate! But how about mysql 5 ? 5.0 will come later on (once Francesco is a dev). If you want it now, go and find Francesco's overlay. And wath about spliting mysq into mysql-server and mysql-client how it do like in FreeBSD. No. If you want a client-only MySQL, you can do USE=minimal. -- Robin Hugh Johnson E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home Page : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2 ICQ# : 30269588 or 41961639 GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpVPZZfOqbra.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Another call for BugVoting on bugs.gentoo.org
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 10:13, Brian Harring wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 09:58:43AM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: Stefan Schweizer wrote: Many bugs in bugzilla have ebuilds contributed, the work is done, there is just no developer to add them to the tree and review them. Bugvoting would allow other developers to see where they can help. For example I am using kde but dont read all kde bugs, so if I would know there is a kde bug with many votes I would maybe look at it. I have mixed feelings about this. Voting would be useful to judge which package gathers sufficient popularity to be added to Portage for example. Currently only packages a developer cares for are added, voting would help to get user opinion. On the other hand, on base system bugs for example voting would be more a pressure tool that might not help much... We could enable voting on a New Ebuilds section and see how it goes ? Seems like a good approach in my opinion. Most of the nays have basically come down to I don't want people voting on stuff I'm working on, I know what needs to be done, don't need extra input to discern it. Ebuild submissions fall squarely outside of that arguement, and would be a good test run of it. Personally, I'd be interested in it for actual portage bugs; that said, I'm not totally sure if I'd want it enabled _now_ since there are internal changes needed rather then more feature bloat, so voting would be ignored till internal bits are done. So who can make the decision here? My 2 cents... ~harring mfg, heinrich :-) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New dev Killerfox (Ren NussBaumer)
On Mon, 16 May 2005 19:36:41 +0200 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nice to finally have you on board! Well, in his case I'm inclined to say it only was a matter of time. :) BTW: are you guys coming to What the Hack this summer? Would be nice to do something for the Austria-Swiss friendship again... ;) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://citizen428.net/http://dev.gentoo.org/~citizen428/ GnuPG key: 0x90CA09E3/4D21 916E DBCE 72B8 CDC5 BD87 DE2D 91A2 90CA 09E3 pgplyNPNpSlzf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] multiple categories for a package
Alin Nastac wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: CVS doesn't support symlinks. But subversion does ;) Doesn't help here. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
