Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:24:26 -0700:
Per-package use.mask is not here for another year and in the mean time I
needed a working solution, this is it.
It think we can have it sooner than another year. There are lots of
On 7/9/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Basically, if you're using daft CFLAGS you're on your own. Some ebuilds
might filter them, some ebuilds might die and some ebuilds might let
them through. Developers are under no obligation to add code to save
users from their own stupidity,
On 7/11/06, Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Their phrase, not mine. ;) I think the idea is you should be able to emerge -e
world and walk away and not have anything interrupt the process thus requiring
the user interact with the system.
Well yes, but an ebuild that dies, whatever the
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 13:54:52 +0200 Denis Dupeyron
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On 7/9/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Basically, if you're using daft CFLAGS you're on your own. Some
| ebuilds might filter them, some ebuilds might die and some ebuilds
| might let them through.
Duncan wrote:
Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Fri, 14 Jul 2006 13:24:26 -0700:
Per-package use.mask is not here for another year and in the mean time I
needed a working solution, this is it.
It think we can have it sooner than another year. There
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
Well yes, but an ebuild that dies, whatever the reason, hasn't much to
do with interactivity.
Fine. Call it the don't-kill-the-emerge-for-silly-reasons philosophy if you
like. I personally don't prefer it, but a lot of people think it's a good idea.
What will follow
Hi,
The local root exploit-of-the-week would have been unable to run if our
users systems had /proc mounted with nosuid and/or noexec
It would be worthwhile considering making this a default. What are
people's thoughts?
Additional testing of this change would be appreciated (just ensure
Hi all,
As some of you already know, I will be taking a hiatus from Gentoo
starting this weekend. While I am gone, the mobile herd is pretty much
left without active developers. Uberlord and phreak have already
adopted some of the more critical ebuilds, but quite a few are still
orphaned as seen
Ryan Hill wrote:
2.95.3, 3.1.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.3.2, 3.3.5, 3.3.6, 3.4.1, 3.4.4, 3.4.5, 3.4.6,
My bad, 3.2.2 is masked for everyone ATM.
--de.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 13:41 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 17:45 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
Hi,
The local root exploit-of-the-week would have been unable to run if our
users systems had /proc mounted with nosuid and/or noexec
It would be worthwhile considering making
On Saturday 15 July 2006 13:41, Ned Ludd wrote:
On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 17:45 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
The local root exploit-of-the-week would have been unable to run if our
users systems had /proc mounted with nosuid and/or noexec
It would be worthwhile considering making this a
Daniel Drake wrote:
Hi,
The local root exploit-of-the-week would have been unable to run if our
users systems had /proc mounted with nosuid and/or noexec
It would be worthwhile considering making this a default. What are
people's thoughts?
Additional testing of this change would be
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 06:07:11PM +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 12:50:12PM +0200, Jose Luis Rivero (YosWinK) wrote:
I would like to nominate kloeri (Bryan Østergaard) to the council if he has
enough free time and if his devrel lead position (where
his work is
On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 08:25:45PM +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
net-wireless/wispy-tools
I'll take this one, since I have the hardware.
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
On 30/06/06, Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm proud to announce the arival of a future developer. His name is Tom. He
arived last monday on 10:22 am (UTC+02). I and my wife will take care of
mentoring him to full developership ;-).
In the meantime, he's got his own album on
On Friday 14 July 2006 11:09, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Friday 14 July 2006 16:43, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
While it is a working solution, it isn't necessarily a sensible one.
You can take over xine-lib and fix it however you prefer.
As this, as well as any other idea you can
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 21:54, Mike Frysinger wrote:
can someone remind me why our arch USE flags are in an opt-out system
rather than opt-in ?
patch attached ... no complaints, i'll merge it in a day or two :p
-mike
pgpkf9VkbsyOW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Saturday 08 July 2006 11:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 11:50:47 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| and i was saying in the namespaced solution you wouldnt need to
| use.mask things because $ARCH_CPU_FEATURES would be set by users in
| the make.conf ... if they go
George Prowse wrote:
I forgot to say that you could call your daughter Jennifer because you
could name her Jen two.
George
...and a rimshot is heard fading in the distance.
Congrats, Paul! ^_^
--
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
Gentoo Forums Global Moderator
GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 /
19 matches
Mail list logo
