Re: [gentoo-dev] package with funny licence

[Ulrich Mueller]

> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Jeroen Roovers wrote:

> 1) Again, it's not a license. It's a copyright notice with a couple
> of jokes attached. It contains no statement granting anyone anything
> with regard to the copyright of the materials it is attached to. Ask
> your lawyer.

Is it even a copyright notice? It doesn't contain the word
"copyright".

> 2) Ulrich didn't mention a category/package or that said package is
> in the tree already, so there probably isn't anything to "dump" at
> this stage.

It is in the tree since 2002.

> 3) Why go overboard and be all negative like that (as to suggest
> dumping the package)? Asking the copyright owner of the package
> is probably the best thing to do even if you do not intend to
> distribute the copyrighted materials and just want to know where you
> legally stand, *regardless* of whether the package is in the tree or
> not.

Meanwhile, I've discovered the following notice on upstream's WWW page
:

   Unless indicated otherwise (and I don't think there are actually any
   exceptions), everything here is either public domain or distributed
   under the terms of the GNU General Public License.

So since it isn't GPL, one could conclude that it is in the public
domain. However, I have send an e-mail asking for clarification.

Ulrich
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.6 / gcc-4.2 going into ~arch

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 July 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
> in the next day or so

sorry, forgot about ~ia64 as well
-mike


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.6 / gcc-4.2 going into ~arch

[Jim Ramsay]

Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 06 July 2007, Jim Ramsay wrote:
>
> > Are there any crazy upgrade paths like the good old libstdc++ bump?
>
> no

And there was great rejoicing.

-- 
Jim Ramsay
Gentoo/Linux Developer (rox,gkrellm)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.6 / gcc-4.2 going into ~arch

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 06 July 2007, Jim Ramsay wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> > glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> > gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
>
> Are there any crazy upgrade paths like the good old libstdc++ bump?

no
-mike


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.6 / gcc-4.2 going into ~arch

[Jim Ramsay]

Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
> glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
> gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86

Are there any crazy upgrade paths like the good old libstdc++ bump?

-- 
Jim Ramsay
Gentoo/Linux Developer (rox,gkrellm)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] glibc-2.6 / gcc-4.2 going into ~arch

[Mike Frysinger]

get your "waaait dont do it" votes in now, i plan on pushing:
glibc-2.6 ~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~x86
gcc-4.2.0 ~amd64 ~x86
in the next day or so
-mike


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] laying out arch profiles

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 05 July 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 12:31 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > maintaining arch things across multiple operating systems is boring me so
> > i'd like to start moving to profiles that outline arch-specific details
> >
> > for example:
> > default-linux/parent:
> > ../base
> > default-linux/sh/parent:
> > ..
> > ../../arch/sh
> > arch/sh/parent:
> > ..
> > arch/parent -> none
> >
> > all of the arch-specific details would be moved out of base/ and into
> > arch/ (like altivec, sse, sse2, mmx, etc...) and then they can be
> > unmasked in the respective arch/$arch/ subdir
> >
> > this would be for 2007.1+ profiles and we can leave the old things in
> > place until we phase out 2007.0 and older completely
>
> This is actually something I was already planning on working on setting
> up.  To avoid conflicting with the current profiles, I was planning on
> making a new profile tree.  I wasn't planning on using it for 2007.1's
> official media, though, but rather just /experimental stuff, since I'd
> rather get much more testing on it before it goes "live" as the default.

you proposing we rearchitect it all or just for testing purposes before going 
live ?  i can see both ...
profiles/frags/
  libc/uclibc/
  libc/gclibc/
  arch/amd64/
  arch/sh/
  kernel/linux/
  kernel/bsd/
  kernel/bsd/freebsd/
  kernel/bsd/openbsd/

profiles/default-linux/amd64/parent
  ../../frags/arch/amd64
  ../../frags/kernel/linux
  ../../frags/libc/glibc
  ..
-mike


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 15:20:55 -0700
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 18:23 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> > How is being a devrel member important for the table? I don't think
> > it's any more special than any other TLP.
> 
> It is very important in the case of Council members as the Council is
> the escalation point for Developer Relations appeals.

The Council is the escalation point for QA appeals too. At least in
theory...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08

[Petteri Räty]

Chris Gianelloni kirjoitti:
> On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 18:23 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
>> How is being a devrel member important for the table? I don't think it's
>> any more special than any other TLP.
> 
> It is very important in the case of Council members as the Council is
> the escalation point for Developer Relations appeals.
> 

True, but I am only in the devrel list because recruiters happens to be
a devrel sub project but in the end it shouldn't matter much whether
there is a tick there or not.

Regards,
Petteri



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 18:23 +0300, Petteri Räty wrote:
> How is being a devrel member important for the table? I don't think it's
> any more special than any other TLP.

It is very important in the case of Council members as the Council is
the escalation point for Developer Relations appeals.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Mon, 2007-07-02 at 21:10 +0200, Torsten Veller wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wolf31o2

While I thank you for the nomination for next year's Gentoo Council, I
have decided that I no longer wish to be associated with the Gentoo
Council or any other form of "management" or "leadership" within Gentoo.
It is simply too stressful being harassed constantly by our developer
pool.  I sincerely hope that whomever decides to run for Council this
year takes into account that of the original elected Council, two have
retired (both due to being tired of having the shit roll downhill to
them) from Gentoo completely, and three of the remaining aren't running
for re-election.

Being a Council member is the worst job in Gentoo.  Be sure you're ready
to be treated like complete shit from your fellow developers all the
while having your integrity questioned daily before accepting your
nominations.  I know that I wouldn't accept a position on the Gentoo
Council even if it was a paying job.

I've also come to realize that trying to give a single direction to
something like Gentoo is an extremely foolish endeavor.  The better
solution is smaller projects and tasks that have defined goals and can
actually be accomplished.  Any kind of general direction for the entire
distribution would either mean leaving out groups, or moving in a
direction that conflicts with the goals of our current groups.  Don't
get me wrong, the Council is definitely needed.  I just think their
focus should be on attainable and measurable goals, not lofty
dreamy-eyed goals with no real way to measure whether we're moving in
the right direction.

Rather than go into more and more what I think are major deficiencies in
what the Council can and can not do due to the ever-changing developer
pool, I think I'll just shut up now.  If anyone wants to discuss with me
any of this stuff, feel free to contact me.

> Say YES or NO.

How about a resounding NO, instead?

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [gentoo-dev] laying out arch profiles

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 12:31 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> maintaining arch things across multiple operating systems is boring me so i'd 
> like to start moving to profiles that outline arch-specific details
> 
> for example:
> default-linux/parent:
>   ../base
> default-linux/sh/parent:
>   ..
>   ../../arch/sh
> arch/sh/parent:
>   ..
> arch/parent -> none
> 
> all of the arch-specific details would be moved out of base/ and into arch/ 
> (like altivec, sse, sse2, mmx, etc...) and then they can be unmasked in the 
> respective arch/$arch/ subdir
> 
> this would be for 2007.1+ profiles and we can leave the old things in place 
> until we phase out 2007.0 and older completely

This is actually something I was already planning on working on setting
up.  To avoid conflicting with the current profiles, I was planning on
making a new profile tree.  I wasn't planning on using it for 2007.1's
official media, though, but rather just /experimental stuff, since I'd
rather get much more testing on it before it goes "live" as the default.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: package with funny licence

[Steve Long]

Jeroen Roovers wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:28:04 +0100
> Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> It maybe be Published by some group, but they seem to make no
>> restrictions whatsoever. As such, I'd personally feel quite happy
>> using it as-is; I don't think they much care either way :-)
> 
> Hmmm. A license is *needed* as long as modifying/distributing the
> package is restricted by copyright. The as-is license specifically
> grants you the right to use the software it pertains to. Without an
> explicit license, you may not (ever) modify or distribute it. You would
> need to obtain permission from the copyright owner in that case -
> otherwise the normal copyright restrictions are in effect.
>
Sure but afaict they disavow all restrictions. In response (aiui) to the
standard question "What may we do with this?" the first line reads:
"You're allowed. You're a bozo."

"The BOZO Manifesto" takes up the rest of the document, wherein
"The Bozotic Software Foundation (hereafter referred to as "us" or
"you" or "everyone except Emacs-19")" imo stipulates that in effect the
users are part of the group holding publishing rights, or rather that the
code is public domain ("everyone except Emacs-19".)

> Again, to ask the copyright owner for a simple (written) statement
> saying how the software may be (freely or not) distributed and modified
> is currently the next step.
> 
Agreed; I'm sure I've seen that [EMAIL PROTECTED] addy on other software if 
manson is
non-responsive. An email counts as written ofc, although a gpg sig might be
advisable. (Although I do not think this particular case merits such
caution.. but then, I'm a bozo ;)


-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-Last Rites: net-irc/bitchx

[Tom Wesley]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 01:48:20PM +0200, Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> 
> is there a script to mimic bx in irssi or epic5?
> 
> lu

There are specific scripts to minic specific functionality, so whatever
you're missing can probably be replicated.  Find a #irssi :)

tomaw



pgpmZ7Wi0XvfU.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-Last Rites: net-irc/bitchx

[Michael Hanselmann]

Hi Luca

On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 01:14:00PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Workalike client suggested?

After using BitchX for several years, I switch to irssi like 2.5 years
ago. It felt like the most similar client, altough they're a bit
different.

Greets,
Michael

-- 
http://hansmi.ch/


pgp2G8WMBGP2J.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-Last Rites: net-irc/bitchx

[Raúl Porcel]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Luca Barbato wrote:
> 
> Workalike client suggested?
> 
> lu
> 

epic5,epic4,irssi,ircii,ninja,scrollz,weechat

:)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGjNXXuQc30/atMkARAsXsAJ9PxFfcLJaswWEPb1uPDehxwdzO1ACeJ2wZ
GDewz+GtA+3375P7o9jDe34=
=Aqyn
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Pre-Last Rites: net-irc/bitchx

[Luca Barbato]

Markus Ullmann wrote:
> As we know from previous bugs and mails here on -dev, bitchx is pretty
> much unmaintained and now has an open security bug.
> 
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183149
> 
> So if no-one wants to take it, p.masking it in a week from now and
> remove it regular 30 days after.
> 

Workalike client suggested?

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato

Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Pre-Last Rites: net-irc/bitchx

[Markus Ullmann]

As we know from previous bugs and mails here on -dev, bitchx is pretty
much unmaintained and now has an open security bug.

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183149

So if no-one wants to take it, p.masking it in a week from now and
remove it regular 30 days after.

-Jokey



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: cyclic dependency

[Vieri Di Paola]

--- Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Is a
> PDEPEND possible?

I followed your suggestion and posted a couple of
ebuilds for the upcoming Shorewall 4 package:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174588

I am not seeing cyclic dependency issues anymore.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Vieri



  

Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel 
and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Properties of package sets

[Marius Mauch]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:07:28 +0200
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Please reply on gentoo-portage-dev, _not_ on gentoo-dev, thanks.
> 
> One missing feature in portage is the lack of package sets. Before we
> (re)start working on that however I'd like to get some feedback about
> what properties/features people would expect from portage package set
> support.
> Some key questions:
> 
> - should they simply act like aliases for multiple packages? E.g.
> should `emerge -C sets/kde` be equivalent to `emerge -C kdepkg1
> kdepkg2 kdepkg3 ...`? Or does the behavior need to be "smarter" in
> some ways?
> 
> - what kind of atoms should be supported in sets? Simple and versioned
> atoms for sure, but what about complex atoms (use-conditional, any-of,
> blockers)?
> 
> - should sets be supported everywhere, or only in selected use cases?
> (everywhere would include depstrings for example)
> 
> - what use cases are there for package sets? Other than the
> established "system" and "world", and the planned "all" and
> "security" sets.
> 
> - how/where should sets be stored/distributed?

Forgot one question:

- should sets have metadata? (e.g. a description for searching)

There hasn't been much feedback yet, so if you want to add anything now
is your chance, otherwise I'll implement things the way that works
best/is easiest for me, which might be different from what you expect.

Marius

PS: I also accept off-list replies

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature