Re: [gentoo-dev] Seeking questions for a user survey
On Jan 15, 2008 4:05 AM, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was really speaking mostly of the people who dislike the *idea* of an Installer for Gentoo, and then go and bash it as much as they can without providing any real evidence or reasons, except for the old faithful it's against the spirit of Gentoo reason, which is a complete fallacy. Again, Gentoo is about empowering the users to make their own decisions. No, I won't say Gentoo is about choice, because that is *STUPID* in that it gives people an excuse to argue about even the biggest piece of junk being added to our tree or supported, as if we have to, to give them the choice. Instead, I prefer the concept of empowering the user to make their own choices, where they can choose to add anything that they want in their personal overlay, as we have given them the tools to do so. Now, if a user wants to use an Installer and someone wants to write the code, who are you (or I) to say that they are in the wrong? After all, isn't it that idea of empowering the user *really* the spirit of Gentoo? I think so. I am very pleased to hear from someone who knows the basis of any opened community rules :) To deal with the top-priority issues and drive Gentoo to the right direction, there is the council in charge of helping devs to go where it needs. But restraining users -or devs- projects is not the right way. Gal' -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-misc/zaptel: ChangeLog zaptel-1.2.22.1-r1.ebuild
On Tuesday 15 January 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 05:34 Tue 15 Jan , Rajiv Aaron Manglani (rajiv) wrote:
1.1 net-misc/zaptel/zaptel-1.2.22.1-r1.ebuild
file :
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/net-misc/zaptel/zaptel-1.
2.22.1-r1.ebuild?rev=1.1view=markup plain:
http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/net-misc/zaptel/zaptel-1.
2.22.1-r1.ebuild?rev=1.1content-type=text/plain
# fix permissions if there's no udev around
if [[ -d ${D}/dev/zap ]]; then
chown -R root:dialout ${D}/dev/zap
chmod -R u=rwX,g=rwX,o= ${D}/dev/zap
fi
You can check whether udev's around by looking for /dev/.udev -- that
way you don't hack around with /dev files for no reason.
but what about mdev ? devfs ? $random-magic-hotplug-flavor ?
# fix permissions if there's no udev around
if [[ -d ${ROOT}dev/zap ]]; then
chown -R root:dialout ${ROOT}dev/zap
chmod -R u=rwX,g=rwX,o= ${ROOT}dev/zap
fi
}
And again..
i'd just straight up say that /dev/ management is the user's problem, not
ebuilds, and it's up to the user to dictate policies. keep the ebuilds
clean.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Seeking questions for a user survey
On Monday 14 January 2008, likewhoa wrote: On Jan 15, 2008 12:16 AM, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 22:53 +, likewhoa wrote: Which livecd(s) do they prefer? Gentoo livecd-2007.0 Sabayon livecd Sysresccd Knoppix My own Other Be sure to list the Minimal CD and the Universal CD, as well as the LiveCD, and also list the LiveDVD. We'll have to relate this data to the architecture used when we try to make anything useful out of it, but it'll be more accurate, as I definitely want to know *which* Gentoo media people are using. I would also add something like an older Gentoo CD to the mix. Do you think commercial packages should be part of the main tree? Yes No Why not Never! in unofficial overlay Dunno Is this something that we really even want to ask? I mean, if we're all about trying to provide the best user experience, then binary packages are almost a requirement, especially with binary packages that were originally targeted at specific binary distributions. I tend to see this as one of those religious issues that is best left alone, like emacs versus vi. Yea commercial packages should maybe be part of overlays.gentoo.org so that the tree can stay clean from these types of packages. But I agree if it's decided not to included in the user survey. i dont see any basis for keeping the tree clean other than personal opinions. if you dont want these types of packages, then dont emerge them. there are people who want them, there are people who need them, there are people who hate them, whatever. the package manager is the tool for the end user to decide what to do with their system. anything else is not the way to go. to borrow a few flavor words from Chris, here in Gentoo land we empower the users, we do not force some arbitrary religious thinking on them. we are not the FSF. if a user does not agree with this, then they're certainly free to choose another distribution, and we'll wish them the best of luck (the FSF does have a list of recommended distributions -- Gentoo of course does not appear on that list because our mind set does not match theirs). -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Seeking questions for a user survey
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:33:48 -0800 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, so per the one discussion in #-dev this evening, I'm looking for questions to put on a new user survey. For style of questions, multiple choice (both pick-one and pick-many) or simple integers would be best. However some freeform questions are probably going to end up in there anyway. 'Prefer not to answer' and 'I don't know' should be available in most questions. I don't have the original questions on hand right now (but i'm trying to get them), so used some classical census questions. Some of the ones I threw in are just what came to mind, I'd love to hear more questions and more sections. In the style of census, maybe offering a short form and a long form questionnaire would be useful too? Basic demographics - a bunch of this should probably be optional but recommended - Gender (M, F, and the various other forms here) - Year of birth - # of children?? - How many years have you been using computers? Sociocultural information (again, optional stuff): - Location (country, and free-form city) - Level of education? - Job? (type coding this one is hard, and I'd prefer not to have it) - Income level Such questions usually are a reason to not complete a survey for me, and I don't see how they are relevant to us (except for maybe location). - Do you share your portage tree between systems - Do you share your distfiles between systems - Do you share your binpkgs between systems Those should all be multiple choice or at least be more explicit due to multiple meanings of share (and in case of binpkgs a I don't use binpkgs option should be present as well in some way) Portage-related questions: (portage team, maybe you can help here?) (just brainstorming here) - what feature would you like most to be implemented in portage? (parallel builds, localization, revdep-rebuild integration, overlay sync support, gpg verification support, support for non-ebuild repositories, better query tools, interactive user interface) - do you think that portage has improved significantly over the last 12 months? - how happy are you with portage in general (scale 1-10)? - how happy are you with portage documentation (manpages, official online docs, ...)? - do you use pkgcore/paludis in addition/in place of portage on Gentoo (yes/no/don't know what pkgcore/paludis is)? - would you be in favor of an automated feedback system to report successful/failed package installations for statistical purposes (yes/opt-out/opt-in/no)? - how important is backward compability in the user interface for you (e.g. names of commandline options, output format)? Mind that the survey shouldn't contain too many questions, or many people won't complete it IMHO. I guess 10-30 questions might be the sweet spot, if we have much more we should run multiple surveys for specific topics spread over time. Also can we take measures that such general surveys are repeated at regular intervals (once per year/6 months), as a single survey is a nice snapshot, but the really interesting thing are the trends evolving over time. Marius -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] [Last rites]: net-libs/dclibc
# Raúl Porcel armin76 at gentoo dot org (15 Jan 2008) # Pending removal 15 Feb 2008, upstream discontinued the software # Unstable, old net-libs/dclibc -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and subproject status
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, A brief summary about the Gentoo GUIs project: 1 - Markus (jokey) recently released a new version of Maintainer-Helper. It already has the basic operations running and some people are working in a Gtk+ port. http://dev.gentoo.org/~jokey/maintainer-helper 2 - Donnie (dberkholz) is currently working on a pkgcore back-end for packagekit. This will allow to easily connect graphical interfaces to this package manager. Contact him for further information. http://www.pkgcore.org http://www.packagekit.org 3 - Me (araujo) released a new version of Himerge. It has some bug fixes and a few new operations added. Check the Changelog or web-site. http://www.haskell.org/himerge We also expect to upload a few screen-shots of these projects somewhere in the coming days; for further details about any progress, please check #gentoo-guis or the gentoo-guis mailing list. Thanks - -- Luis F. Araujo araujo at gentoo.org Gentoo Linux -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHjPUcBCmRZan6aegRAt1UAKDcmGHQY2FSEp1w9dqpkXgOHoKtGACgoAA+ rQVum/VrWiz7dQ1QXZeAUkE= =SKGW -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Introducing new lead for xfce herd and project.
Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead. - drac -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing new lead for xfce herd and project.
Yay for dice! :D On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 00:06 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead. - drac signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing new lead for xfce herd and project.
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Peter Weller wrote: Yay for dice! :D On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 00:06 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead. - drac Congrats welp, so what are you plans as new overlord of the free world? -- Patrick Ohearn Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Site: http://ge3k.net pgpw9Y5vyEO3L.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation
Mark Loeser wrote: Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: a) Keep use.desc as it is: a list of common flags and a short general description of their meaning. Sounds good. b) Keep use.local.desc as it is: a list of per-package flags that are specific to one to a few ebuilds (i think 5 is the number though i think 10 is more appropriate, but that's not relevant to this discussion). Again, each has a short description. Also fine. c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc. In the case that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc description overrides the use.desc one. This allows a more specific per-package description of global flags. Still doing alright :) d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have begun to do already, for cases where more info is needed. For example I'd like to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and what legal implications disabling it can have. Why can't this be done in use.local.desc? My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description), one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right. -- fonts,by design, by neglect gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect wxwindows @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing new lead for xfce herd and project.
Not much. Aside from the continuation of my plans for world domination! (Oops, did I mention that in public? :o) Night night dears! :P On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 08:50 +1000, Patrick Ohearn wrote: On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, Peter Weller wrote: Yay for dice! :D On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 00:06 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead. - drac Congrats welp, so what are you plans as new overlord of the free world? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation
Vlastimil Babka wrote: Ryan Hill wrote: What do people think of this? a) Keep use.desc as it is: a list of common flags and a short general description of their meaning. Good. b) Keep use.local.desc as it is: a list of per-package flags that are specific to one to a few ebuilds (i think 5 is the number though i think 10 is more appropriate, but that's not relevant to this discussion). Again, each has a short description. c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc. In the case that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc description overrides the use.desc one. This allows a more specific per-package description of global flags. Good. d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have begun to do already, for cases where more info is needed. For example I'd like to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and what legal implications disabling it can have. Right. Also why not also add short descriptions there, and deprecate use.local.desc when tools are converted? Placing package-local info to global files (when not needed to distinguish profiles as with package.use.mask etc) is icky. Note that the metadata.xml should be able to record per-version differences somehow. Then instead of grepping a file I would need to read XML. Also icky. Utils would help, but then utils would need to implement an XML parser. -- fonts,by design, by neglect gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect wxwindows @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing new lead for xfce herd and project.
Samuli Suominen wrote: Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead. - drac You're kidding... -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing new lead for xfce herd and project.
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 00:06 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead. Not really retired, just not doing ebuild work anymore (only doing events management for LWE and the like). That being said, congrats welp! --Dan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Available hardware
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 16:25 -0800, Daniel Ostrow wrote: All: As I am no longer an ebuild dev (real life job got in the way) I have a whole slew of hardware that I'm willing to ship to any gentoo dev for the cost of shipping alone. The list of hardware is as follows: 1x HP C3700 750 MHz PA-RISC 1x Dec/Compaq PWS 600 600 MHz Alpha 1x SGI Octane2 Dual 195 MHz Mips 1x HP ZX2000 1.4 GHz Itanium2 1x Apple G4 1.25 GHz PPC32 I also have a slew of SPARC hardware, need to go home and catalog that, not all that sure what all I have. I can answer any questions about the other specs of the machine upon request. If anyone is interested contact me off list. I live in northern California for shipping reference. G4 has been spoken for. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Available hardware
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:25:21 -0800 Daniel Ostrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If anyone is interested contact me off list. I live in northern California for shipping reference. That counts all Europeans out, I guess. Shipping is horrendous across the Pond, even to the UK, let alone the hop across the Canal. :\ Kind regards, JeR -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:00 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description), one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right. A single long line still fills this requirement for us. However, it does bring up the point. Why even have use.local.desc (or metadata.xml's use tag) at all? Is there really a need for a *global* list of flags that are ebuild-specific? (I don't care or have much opinion, either way, I'm merely presenting some topic for discussion on this.) -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Available hardware
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 16:25 -0800, Daniel Ostrow wrote: 1x HP ZX2000 1.4 GHz Itanium2 I know that you said off-list, but I'm stating this here simply because I want to make sure people know that I have dibs if this meets my needs. Can this box be upgraded to SMP? If not, I rescind my dibs since mine is more powerful. I just want to be able to have decent video so I can do games on IA64. As you know, my Itanium box is a server without AGP and with only PCI-X (so PCI video is my only choice). -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation
On 1/15/08, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 17:00 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description), one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right. A single long line still fills this requirement for us. However, it does bring up the point. Why even have use.local.desc (or metadata.xml's use tag) at all? Is there really a need for a *global* list of flags that are ebuild-specific? (I don't care or have much opinion, either way, I'm merely presenting some topic for discussion on this.) The global use.* files are convenient because it means we don't need to generate or push a cache for the data (like for metadata). If it was per package or per-ebuild we would need to generate a cache to answer queries like 'what does the foo flag do'. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Available hardware
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 18:27 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 16:25 -0800, Daniel Ostrow wrote: 1x HP ZX2000 1.4 GHz Itanium2 I know that you said off-list, but I'm stating this here simply because I want to make sure people know that I have dibs if this meets my needs. Can this box be upgraded to SMP? If not, I rescind my dibs since mine is more powerful. I just want to be able to have decent video so I can do games on IA64. As you know, my Itanium box is a server without AGP and with only PCI-X (so PCI video is my only choice). Consider your dibs rescinded. It is uni-proc only. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Available hardware
Hey Dan, You don't happen to have IRIX discs for the Octane2 do you? I have an O2, and I wanted to install IRIX on it to test some stuff out, but I lost the disks and SGI wants $450 to send me new ones (yikes!). On Jan 15, 2008, at 16:25, Daniel Ostrow wrote: All: As I am no longer an ebuild dev (real life job got in the way) I have a whole slew of hardware that I'm willing to ship to any gentoo dev for the cost of shipping alone. The list of hardware is as follows: 1x HP C3700 750 MHz PA-RISC 1x Dec/Compaq PWS 600 600 MHz Alpha 1x SGI Octane2 Dual 195 MHz Mips 1x HP ZX2000 1.4 GHz Itanium2 1x Apple G4 1.25 GHz PPC32 I also have a slew of SPARC hardware, need to go home and catalog that, not all that sure what all I have. I can answer any questions about the other specs of the machine upon request. If anyone is interested contact me off list. I live in northern California for shipping reference. Thanks, --Dan -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag documentation
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Mark Loeser wrote: Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: c) Allow flags from use.desc to also exist in use.local.desc. In the case that a flag for a package exists in both, the use.local.desc description overrides the use.desc one. This allows a more specific per-package description of global flags. Still doing alright :) d) Allow long descriptions in a package's metadata.xml, as some have begun to do already, for cases where more info is needed. For example I'd like to explain exactly what the bindist flag on freetype does and what legal implications disabling it can have. Why can't this be done in use.local.desc? My expectation is that `grep flag use.local.desc` will give me a list of packages using that flag (or having it in the description), one per line. Putting paragraphs in there doesn't seem right. One could argue that you can't do that currently for DEPEND strings and such, so that seems like a possibly weak argument to me. Just because you can do something right now doesn't mean it was meant to be that way, or shouldn't be changed to make things better :) Either way, I would prefer (and I'm sure others will as well since it will cut down on confusion) if we pick either use.local.desc or to move them into metadata.xml. Having it possibly be in both places just seems silly. -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com pgpKNKGoZLuMg.pgp Description: PGP signature
