Re: [gentoo-dev] looking for mentor
I may not have interpreted your message correctly. If I inferred something from it that you didn't intend to convey, please clarify. Developing the Portage software itself is an entirely different process than creating an ebuild: unless you're planning to contribute enhancement code to Gentoolkit or Portage, they're just a set of tools for package development and management. In order to create an ebuild, you need to know what package you /want/ to bring into the tree. Randomly submitting ebuilds that will shortly thereafter be without a home is only a recipe for neglected packages. I'm aware of the fact that building portage related software is different from creating ebuilds. I'm interested in the openoffice ebuilds, as well as scheme and some lisp related ebuilds. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Looking for a dev-web mentor
I saw the post by Joans and I decided to bring it up again. About two months ago I came here wanting to become a developer, since I'm a PHP programmer I came to Stuart asking him to by my mentor and help me get to know things before opening a developer bug for me. Lately stuart was pretty busy and I hardly ever hear from him, so I was wondering if someone else could be my mentor. My name is Omer Cohen (omercnet on freenode), I'm 18 years old an I'm Israeli. I'd really appriciate your kind response :)-- Thanks,Omer Cohenwww.omerc.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[gentoo-dev] Re: Looking for a dev-web mentor
Adding my resume for those who are interested www.omerc.net/O.Cohen-CV.en.doc I don't think that posting your CV in doc format is a very good primer step, isn't it? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Looking for a dev-web mentor
what's wrong with that? :/ On 6/5/05, aLeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adding my resume for those who are interested www.omerc.net/O.Cohen-CV.en.docI don't think that posting your CV in doc format is a very good primerstep, isn't it?--gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- Thanks,Omer Cohenwww.omerc.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Looking for a dev-web mentor
El dom, 05-06-2005 a las 14:48 +0200, Omer Cohen escribi: what's wrong with that? :/ The url is not working and therefore, it's not a very good idea to use close text formats so as you can use rtf, pdf, html... Make things easy and don't complicate them (it's only my opinion) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Looking for a dev-web mentor
On Sunday 05 June 2005 13:48, Omer Cohen wrote: what's wrong with that? :/ On 6/5/05, aLeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adding my resume for those who are interested www.omerc.net/O.Cohen-CV.en.doc http://www.omerc.net/O.Cohen-CV.en.doc I don't think that posting your CV in doc format is a very good primer step, isn't it? Well top posting kind of screws up the quoted conversation order a little :) Also posting your CV in MS Word format when we all develop and use Gentoo Linux is bad because that is a closed document format most would have trouble reading (were they to even try). Using an open format readable by all - such as OpenOffice, (X)HTML, plain text, PDF, LaTeX or probably others I have not mentioned would be a much better way to do it. I hope that clears it up for you. There are many guides on the net about netiquette, and why closed formats are bad for open communication. Marcus -- Gentoo Linux Developer Scientific Applications | AMD64 | KDE | net-proxy pgpb3V7YmpEY1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Looking for a dev-web mentor
I dropped the file since I thought there was somthing wrong with it, I'll put it back on right now as rtf. www.omerc.net/O.Cohen-CV.en.rtf enjoy On 6/5/05, aLeJ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: El dom, 05-06-2005 a las 14:48 +0200, Omer Cohen escribió: what's wrong with that? :/The url is not working and therefore, it's not a very good idea to use close text formats so as you can use rtf, pdf, html... Make things easyand don't complicate them (it's only my opinion)--gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- Thanks,Omer Cohenwww.omerc.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Looking for a dev-web mentor
Omer Cohen *top-posted*:
what's wrong with that? :/
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
While, sure, OpenOffice _can_ read Word format, it's far from perfect at
doing so... and besides, we're in the business of promoting Open Source,
not pushing it to one side. ;-)
Also, can you please disable HTML email composition (might be termed
rich-text), not all of us here use HTML-capable email clients. And try
not to top-post[1], it makes big threads very difficult to read when
posts appear in reverse cronological order.
Regards,
--
_ Stuart Longland (a.k.a Redhatter)
/ _ \ ______ __| |__ __ __ Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs
- (_) \ / \ ; \(__ __)/ \ / \Developer
\// O _| / /\ \ | | | /\ | /\ |
/ / \ /__| / \ \ | | | \/ | \/ |
(___/ \/|_; |_| \_/ \__/ \__/ http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter
Footnotes:
1. This is mentioned in RFC1855, which I have mirrored at
http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter/misc/rfc1855.txt
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way I ever seen. Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt, pam_smb in net-misc and so on. I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with implementations (Linux-PAM and OpenPAM) and the modules needed. Such a change would require a lot of work and we can't count on epkgmove I think, but if someone is going to help me or at least tell me how to do such a change without breaking everything (always if such a change is accepted, obv.).. Comments? -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò Gentoo Developer (Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Gentoo/AMD64) http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ pgpepVVSK65tg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way I ever seen. Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt, pam_smb in net-misc and so on. I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with implementations (Linux-PAM and OpenPAM) and the modules needed. Such a change would require a lot of work and we can't count on epkgmove I think, but if someone is going to help me or at least tell me how to do such a change without breaking everything (always if such a change is accepted, obv.).. Comments? I made a bugfix release of epkgmove just the other day. It should now move packages correctly, though you'll still need to check it's actions like a hawk. See http://dev.gentoo.org/~port001/DevTools/epkgmove/Testing/ Take a look at #84015 also. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCoyFjefZ4eWAXRGIRAuUJAJ9PZZ5bOrDswXdqz5vLrvMWQmukVACeJA7b /Fw1l1GsrrjWITG8MrtIwE8= =ZfrV -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 16:22 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way I ever seen. Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt, pam_smb in net-misc and so on. I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with implementations (Linux-PAM and OpenPAM) and the modules needed. Such a change would require a lot of work and we can't count on epkgmove I think, but if someone is going to help me or at least tell me how to do such a change without breaking everything (always if such a change is accepted, obv.).. Comments? Diego: This is not directed at you solely but expresses my general feelings on the topic of ever moving packages. I think they are fine where they are. Moving stuff around is a waste of time. Makes things more complex. Makes more work on everybody. Invalidates binary package trees. It places stress on rsync servers. It makes people have to rewrite rsync_exclude files. Makes it harder for scripts that interact with portage. And in the end really gains us next to nothing. Please stop moving stuff around for cosmetic reasons. I see far to many threads about changing stuff. No real valuable work ever gets done. Stuff simply just gets shifted around somebody can think of a new way to categorize existing data. -- Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
Ned Ludd wrote: On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 16:22 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way I ever seen. Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt, pam_smb in net-misc and so on. I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with implementations (Linux-PAM and OpenPAM) and the modules needed. Such a change would require a lot of work and we can't count on epkgmove I think, but if someone is going to help me or at least tell me how to do such a change without breaking everything (always if such a change is accepted, obv.).. Comments? Diego: This is not directed at you solely but expresses my general feelings on the topic of ever moving packages. I think they are fine where they are. Moving stuff around is a waste of time. Makes things more complex. Makes more work on everybody. Invalidates binary package trees. It places stress on rsync servers. It makes people have to rewrite rsync_exclude files. Makes it harder for scripts that interact with portage. And in the end really gains us next to nothing. Please stop moving stuff around for cosmetic reasons. I see far to many threads about changing stuff. No real valuable work ever gets done. Stuff simply just gets shifted around somebody can think of a new way to categorize existing data. I do agree with you but some package just have completely wrong place within portage, such package placements migh confuse the user. To give an example: mzscheme was placed in dev-lisp while portage had a dev-scheme directory. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.11.12-r2 request for testers
On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 21:59 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wednesday 25 May 2005 06:20 pm, Mike Frysinger wrote: yes, it's finally that time ... after months of hearing us say 'we want to get new baselayout stable asap', we're serious last chance ! can someone forward the original e-mail here to gentoo-user ? The comments back from gentoo-user have been that it works fine. One was a glowing endorsement of all the changes. Regards, Paul -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 foser wrote: On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 18:34 +0200, Jonas Geiregat wrote: I do agree with you but some package just have completely wrong place within portage, such package placements migh confuse the user. To give an example: mzscheme was placed in dev-lisp while portage had a dev-scheme directory. The current set-up isn't user-browseable anyway and hasn't been for a long time. I don't think the focus should be on correcting that in the tree, the user tools should be improved really. Then why is their a browsable Categories link on the packages site? http://packages.gentoo.org/categories/ I don't agree with Ned. Organizing the packages logically makes things less confusing for the end-user and developers alike and doesn't qualify as a cosmetic reason. It *is* valuable work, IMHO. That's not to say that the user tools shouldn't be improved where possible, of course. I don't think anyone would argue with that. Nathan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCozWL2QTTR4CNEQARAoVuAJ439WPwSg8qj0+pUWusNWMhtYMXKQCfZlTU w8wP8vkA5nTTLFoqRlWvsK4= =sbo+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 13:50 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote: Solar, I realize you meant this as a general statement of opinion and not a flame-baiter, but can you elaborate on: On Sunday 05 June 2005 11:37, Ned Ludd wrote: Invalidates binary package trees. My (wrong?) understanding was that this is addressed when portage runs a fixpackages (otherwise what's it doing to all those binary packages?). I ask because its no secret that I'm working on a split up of dev-perl from the 500+ packages to a better organized, reasonable scenario where packages are categorized based on, well, category :) rather than on the fact that they contain some perl bits or module bits, stuff them in dev-perl. In my experience, fixpackages doesn't actually fix this sometimes. I've had to phsyically delete the binary package and recreate it for the category to be fixed. Sadly, I haven't had time to search for a bug on it. -- Lance Albertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager --- GPG Public Key: http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1 4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742 ramereth/irc.freenode.net signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 19:34 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: On Sunday 05 June 2005 17:37, Ned Ludd wrote: I think they are fine where they are. Moving stuff around is a waste of time. Makes things more complex. Makes more work on everybody. Sorry but I don't agree with that, at least for the particular case of pam. The way it's now, makes my work hardware than it could be having them in order. If I want to look for pam modules which needs to be fixed, I need to go through a list with eix looking for them. Also two similar modules like pam_ssh and pam_ssh_agent are respectively in app-crypt and sys-libs. And sorry, I don't think that everytime I need to find out what I need to change or test I need to do some strange query like eix -r [^s]\?pam -o ^pam. 14 files matching the pam prefix and 18 thing matching description. app-admin/pam_dotfile (Mail related) pam module to allow password-storing in $HOME/dotfiles app-crypt/pam_krb5 (Should of been put in sys-libs) Pam module for MIT Kerberos V app-vim/pam-syntax (Seems logical) vim plugin: PAM configuration syntax highlighting dev-perl/Authen-PAM (Seems logical) Interface to PAM library kde-base/kcheckpass (Seems logical) KDE pam client that allows you to auth as a specified user without actually doing anything as that user. kde-base/kdebase-pam (Seems logical) pam.d files used by several KDE components. kde-base/secpolicy (Not sure) KDE: Display PAM security policies net-libs/pam_ldap (Should of been sys-libs) PAM LDAP Module net-mail/checkpassword-pam (Seems logical) checkpassword-compatible authentication program w/pam support net-mail/poppassd_ceti (Seems logical) Password change daemon with PAM support net-misc/pam_smb (Should of been sys-libs) The PAM SMB module, which allows authentication against an NT server. net-www/mod_auth_pam (Seems logical) PAM authentication module for Apache sys-apps/pam-login (Seems logical not a lib but a program) Based on the sources from util-linux, with added pam and shadow features sys-libs/pam_mysql (Seems logical) pam_mysql is a module for pam to authenticate users with mysql sys-libs/pam_passwdqc (Seems logical) Password strength checking for PAM aware password changing programs sys-libs/pam_pwdfile (Seems logical) PAM module for authenticating against passwd-like files. sys-libs/pam_ssh_agent (Seems logical) PAM module that spawns a ssh-agent and adds identities using the password supplied at login sys-libs/pam_usb (Seems logical) A PAM module that enables authentication using an USB-Storage device (such as an USB Pen) through DSA private/public keys. --- If you really feel you must invalidate everybody else binary trees and adding a workload on others for your gain then go for it. But adding another category for what are clearly mostly system libraries does not make sense me in this case. So sorry I object to new category creation for PAM. -- Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 13:25 -0400, Nathan L. Adams wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 foser wrote: On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 18:34 +0200, Jonas Geiregat wrote: I do agree with you but some package just have completely wrong place within portage, such package placements migh confuse the user. To give an example: mzscheme was placed in dev-lisp while portage had a dev-scheme directory. The current set-up isn't user-browseable anyway and hasn't been for a long time. I don't think the focus should be on correcting that in the tree, the user tools should be improved really. Then why is their a browsable Categories link on the packages site? http://packages.gentoo.org/categories/ I don't agree with Ned. Organizing the packages logically makes things less confusing for the end-user and developers alike and doesn't qualify as a cosmetic reason. It *is* valuable work, IMHO. And how long before somebody proposes sys-auth? *poof* we now reshuffle, but then we can do auth with ldap. So lets move all the */ldap* related subjects under it sys-auth/... Then a month or six later comes along sys-ldap and it gets moved there. The logic will go full circle before long if we consistently keep shuffling packages around. All in all this is seriously the reason why ebuilds have a DESCRIPTION= and one of the reasons we have metadata.xml files. -- Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
Nathan L. Adams wrote: Then why is their a browsable Categories link on the packages site? http://packages.gentoo.org/categories/ Very good question , .. I don't agree with Ned. Organizing the packages logically makes things less confusing for the end-user and developers alike and doesn't qualify as a cosmetic reason. It *is* valuable work, IMHO. I often use simple unix tools like ls grep etc .. to search for things in my portage tree I find that this goes alot quicker then using the user utilities , so I guess your right those need more attention then the tree structure. That's not to say that the user tools shouldn't be improved where possible, of course. I don't think anyone would argue with that. Nathan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 21:21 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: On Sunday 05 June 2005 21:03, Ned Ludd wrote: 14 files matching the pam prefix and 18 thing matching description. You missed pam_ssh. And that's just an example. By the way... mind telling everyone here how did you do that search? I still feel that looking for pam things in a *single* place is more useful than looking in many different places. I ran q search pam | grep -i -v SPAM and it took 0.665 seconds. Quite a bit faster than having to cd $PORTDIR and cd foo ; cd .. ; cd bar ; cd .. If you feel that sys-auth is more logical, seems good to me. I haven't said that it *must* be sys-pam.. was a proposal and as proposal is something I'd like to discuss. Not really. We currently have about 138 categories and 19443 ebuilds in 9413 uniq package names. That's something like 68 on average packages per category with the addition 1 new category it only brings that average down to 67 things. I counted about ~20 PAM things in the entire tree which is less than one third of the global per package average category count. If you really feel you must invalidate everybody else binary trees and adding a workload on others for your gain then go for it. For my gain? Wait I was talking of me in this case but it's not just me. Sure it is. You proposed it. You make reference of being the one that needs to fix things more than one time. I think everyone which is looking for pam modules would like to search something like sys-pam, instead of looking here and there on the tree or trying to use some strange black-magic queries. By the way, if you're looking for pam modules, your results are quite full of cruft. No strictly all PAM listed in the description. If something was missing from the description then that given ebuild should be fixed to reflect it. But adding another category for what are clearly mostly system libraries does not make sense me in this case. Currently sys-libs contains a very wide range of things, just a couple of them seems to be strictly related. As I said, if you feel sys-auth is better, good. That would probably take also other things like courier-authlib for example. But sys-libs doesn't seem the right place for me. Please hold off on the creation of any new categories till robbat2 and Azarah get a chance to comment, if they are for it I'll shutup. -- Ned Ludd [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ned Ludd wrote: *poof* we now reshuffle, but then we can do auth with ldap. So lets move all the */ldap* related subjects under it sys-auth/... Then a month or six later comes along sys-ldap and it gets moved there. The logic will go full circle before long if we consistently keep shuffling packages around. All in all this is seriously the reason why ebuilds have a DESCRIPTION= and one of the reasons we have metadata.xml files. Well obviously there needs to be a consensus on *how* to logically organize things before anyone goes willy nilly changing stuff. Do you group by what the package is used for (email vs. game vs. web browser) or by what it is built from (PERL stuff, Gnome apps, KDE apps). It appears that currently its a mix. Is that documented anywhere? I personally think the organization should be from an end-user perspective as much as possible. Imagine for a moment that you are a Genewbie (new Gentoo user). You have a new minimal installation and you want to add some applications. How do you know what your choices are for an email client, for instance? You could find most things here: http://packages.gentoo.org/packages/?category=mail-client But that wouldn't let you know about kmail, a fairly important option. If you were to do a search, you wouldn't get much either: # emerge -s email Searching... [ Results for search key : email ] [ Applications found : 5 ] * dev-perl/Email-Find * dev-perl/Email-Valid * net-mail/archivemail * net-mail/email * net-mail/sendEmail So while the metadata.xml files do exist, I don't see how they are _currently_ very useful to the end-users. Again, I think better organization and improved tools are both worth while. Nathan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCo2cv2QTTR4CNEQARAo5tAJ0STkaF2m46JPxysx9tGGCz4wZHZQCfUElz 6RRmFZVvhp2Otr9ZA9yUVHE= =gW6X -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Nathan L. Adams wrote: Well obviously there needs to be a consensus on *how* to logically organize things before anyone goes willy nilly changing stuff. Do you group by what the package is used for (email vs. game vs. web browser) or by what it is built from (PERL stuff, Gnome apps, KDE apps). It appears that currently its a mix. Is that documented anywhere? I personally think the organization should be from an end-user perspective as much as possible. Imagine for a moment that you are a Genewbie (new Gentoo user). You have a new minimal installation and you want to add some applications. How do you know what your choices are for an email client, for instance? You could find most things here: http://packages.gentoo.org/packages/?category=mail-client But that wouldn't let you know about kmail, a fairly important option. If you were to do a search, you wouldn't get much either: # emerge -s email Searching... [ Results for search key : email ] [ Applications found : 5 ] * dev-perl/Email-Find * dev-perl/Email-Valid * net-mail/archivemail * net-mail/email * net-mail/sendEmail So while the metadata.xml files do exist, I don't see how they are _currently_ very useful to the end-users. Again, I think better organization and improved tools are both worth while. Nathan Oooops. I just realized that I did a --search instead of a --searchdesc. But I doubt most users even realize that --searchdesc even exists, so my argument there still applies. ;) Nathan -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCo2iK2QTTR4CNEQARAjgtAJ0TysMfDTptn9U1v7NlquVpONevVQCZAbA6 TYcZJnMAAhsgcNwpKw6fiO4= =H/f5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 04:22:10PM +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten? wrote: Currently pam stuff (implementations, modules) are organized in the worst way I ever seen. Most of them are in sys-libs, some of them in app-admin, other in app-crypt, pam_smb in net-misc and so on. I think we should reorganize them and have a sys-pam category with implementations (Linux-PAM and OpenPAM) and the modules needed. I'd say sys-auth (standing for System authentication and authorization), as then all packages dealing with NSS can be moved as well: sys-libs/libnss-mysql sys-libs/libnss-pgsql sys-libs/nss-db sys-libs/nss-mysql net-libs/nss_ldap -- 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 pgpvDx2FSy6tk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 17:44 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote: [snip] it is a laborious work, but it could be done. too bad we don't use subversion :( I wonder if there is a svn interface to cvs, or if one could be written. -- === Mike Doty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead PGP Key: 0xA797C7A7 Gentoo Developer Relations ===GPG Fingerprint=== 0094 7F06 913E 78D6 F1BB 06BA D0AD D125 A797 C7A7 === signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: sys-pam category
Mike Doty wrote: I wonder if there is a svn interface to cvs, or if one could be written. rename/move is a feature of the svn database, not of the svn interface. also support symlinks, btw. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] New global useflag proposal: radius
at the moment, there are 2 radius local useflags: [+ C ] radius (net-dialup/ppp): Enables RADIUS support [+ C ] radius (net-misc/gnugk): Enables radius support but seems that net-misc/ser should also have such flag. any objections? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: New global useflag proposal: radius
Nothing wrong with having three packages with a local use flag. Global use flags are for use flags with global appeal/usage. So far, to me it looks like radius should stay a local use flag. Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Alin Nastac wrote: at the moment, there are 2 radius local useflags: [+ C ] radius (net-dialup/ppp): Enables RADIUS support [+ C ] radius (net-misc/gnugk): Enables radius support but seems that net-misc/ser should also have such flag. any objections? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: New global useflag proposal: radius
Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- wrote: Nothing wrong with having three packages with a local use flag. Global use flags are for use flags with global appeal/usage. So far, to me it looks like radius should stay a local use flag. Enables RADIUS support isn't general enough for ya? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New global useflag proposal: radius
On Monday 06 June 2005 10:18, Alin Nastac wrote: at the moment, there are 2 radius local useflags: [+ C ] radius (net-dialup/ppp): Enables RADIUS support [+ C ] radius (net-misc/gnugk): Enables radius support but seems that net-misc/ser should also have such flag. any objections? I second this, because, generally there may be more packages, that can be built with (optional) RADIUS support. -- Best rgrds, .coder My Intellect is The Power! (c) The Prodigy pgpGxD8EtWr3y.pgp Description: PGP signature
