[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files: removing the files and profit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi. As outlined in the global email about this issue, this email is to start a thread about removing the files and profit. Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about this point. 6. allow maintainers to work on .la files removal as they see fit After we provide maintainers consistent tools to remove .la files, create some good documentation about this, get a stable version of portage that helps addressing the issue for newly installed packages and warn users, maintainers are free to work on this as they can. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMzPKmAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPAC0P/38Q4kE+Slixt3uKgUdW29tB 8fpawmBadjU74frcvZsM4F4Ufix8fYFJsJUfMPCi9ugcWSkEvVNRkwe7KJEEV8FA t846X8LbokuoL2oLM6i1nVS0VkH+XhAx+1emE36x+OxH2GgAXNzWBJRquEsNMX8v vs2dpkgbvFWh7YbhEkFhfInlyw2o6qMLEtCjp2xRErJ+dAhpijwJUtkkoBJyqPbh UnbhFMeF0TSWUgnKgKiMdNT12BMLyd0NEI6+FXZXd1wB9ZHUiEXWKoCXQklr9wK/ XjzKwEPppf2J2HjgeTIERUkyydEmmBVUZBBdK2XGgmfPVCOa9rUCeV/waEbvwwua 6DV+fZYn4FTSP4cN5iq4wvr/ebu1dpenxijmTDKl/ASZ1rfv9YVuwiFcjzfwS/MB NNrVV0Wqso+znha1Raf4RZuwlXvG0MbA0DG4QedqQ/b0Iwm8FrG26C4nvPlPGU2y bUkg4P/f5PLu5I8iX7MpU8UBjH7gB/I7CxpRpYhZXr0jAT3SUYexQxnIYPeahOQo oAuQCTWDZ1py41zc18Q8mBoqoloVvxXLeLc0uZvoJOlnIAPLMdfSOSRJAjLEMIfM Clszxd3Z6VKTMqFcz3NrJCWyF6wCZplR5KkJ6x3AMA0yRGyTZ2eRMX/M8TG2pY10 bRz4mLBevvY+8YABPcPC =wGyS -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files: PM support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi. As outlined in the global email about this issue, this email is to start a thread about the PM support. Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about this point. 5. Get portage-2.1.9* marked stable. As this portage version will fix the contents of the .la files when installing them, it will prevent the trouble caused by the hard-coded lib references - for all the .la files that will still need to be installed. One issue that remains open to me, is whether there will be any control over this feature. I was told the plan is to have it dependent on FEATURES, which to me doesn't make much sense. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMzPInAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPW7gQAIgOk/MHmum9YEJ07zBpKfiq 04MAQIEZxBnYl5XUFR8Hfeuht2VEPPhDubXJK6IzOjucjwcqdTrZeY7i6Ia5c6WG R2I1mqW+Z0nW21Bo0KAB1vfGeopDHLKzMyrJj55KxemgAalSwy+ot49/JH2Mdy8R jcNHGXBLvT9jGqIqu8P2FZvymiBn5IlCgntYxFUEHeM8TGnSXFRtKrryw2dLhJBw XKe30XmeclMYNjPNH/nCsqHNPGo0eIKU5e/c8Sqm37KGZ8JvoOQpMwxyFtMxmfjp +tUhciHEwjOnc3nNfckxjBQsVrLVQc6d9+bZcYhgfB2hF3riM19H1/EQLqkdQvBQ A4DyZKQlJT1BKRgWFxs/54t/sgDBg+74otVy0qiuXG9SOdvyytFbiclx8o7wACYc txQBpU/u46Iw+3QhJ01QFZkZZwG2kW9xCBCuZQC21AFln34urNnSy4CaHfHpNt2Y qnle/CZVSd3ZjmbPSfA/euSQ97l3LB9xlHt6Jj6Te15bu9hAW38+Vx/2zlY86L0e lvb/wWohrfuh4JzpTU6xOf5tSuVYL5AlXtZusXjUkpSdiNrT/k9clTbP6iItz4NN v43RCoVo/AjwgD/h/wgntR0AYt8ggrirvZjw6h0C5ngjM1h0PJJr5UwmEynW5TdG dkBY0DVCT7xS7VGWSQrO =9Tws -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files: news item
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi. As outlined in the global email about this issue, this email is to start a thread about the news item. Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about this point. 4. Add the news item about pending .la files removal, pointing to 3 and with instructions to run lafilefixer and explaining how portage-2.1.9* addresses this issue. We can base the news item in the existing proposal for this[10]. [10] - http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_c65fd55a78f1418178689df822a25638.xml - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMzPG+AAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPANUP+wREqBLOPSfYlo78QtZK8MZ0 w7wBjIQojURyGYG0K+dHMFIShUpzsOYyJW/o8TXBmpXTDNxynHjou5V6AOJxHvDl pBf3/J17GJy5xNDhH+u1wKooFlZc981AkQhLGkRaLYlgH8I2rK6vSIvOg0Qrc0kw mpWAq3DPWsSRMA9/3cRu7NRXN58hJmdwbdWTprDj5Avc35xkEoe9cSJS9EKcGTFd ZIOxZi74qZZc0ktXaWku5pHx3FUZQh+XWKxz4YVG0zY3KZsdSnp63YFnp+TX7mjv 0lrx0mDaw9qufKAQtIX6QegTwlZKHLff6TofGN82aVtUiZRUoEnqXcjA8KEZNc3+ /ji61vk+iLEl5u11flzuKMsOWhUOH3ahywqbSJa8mTS+5VCBqKxxl0cxOBsiYmfH Pe5t1qfWR9ygdq4sSBU1L8PU0FPGHfam0peVOQ0N3+jpeMGSJE8aub/kheEDGOAX ix+sOvdTyoYYgsLYjUofisL4qBpGVOuL2l3HR4F8HStWrLyTnk4TFbE3h3yTX/hu su3s8qoOi3e0QM9SbS0Gdn1Nr0H9CmhneBk2mq+4wDLfP/WGGd1LWaKlpqB1NObF NtUDS1hzRs/1KRPiz2LPDRsawHOTJOEIBZZ1ilL+ZwHvyi7rwaj5f0Dc3ZMrQpSD HnU94CF3m85RgJ0OwCNO =MeY5 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files: QA document
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi. As outlined in the global email about this issue, this email is to start a thread about the QA document. Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about this point. 3. Add a page to the QA project space (unless they're not interested) about la files and how to deal with them I think we can ask Diego to use large parts of his blog posts and charts about .la files[1], [2], [3], [4] as a source for the document. We can also add some basic info from the autobook[5], [6]. The goal would be to have a document similar to our own --as-needed guide [7] and to other distributions[8], [9]. Anyone wishes to volunteer for this task? QA would such a document be welcomed in your project space? [1] - http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/04/14/whatabout-those-la-files [2] - http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/07/02/again-about-la-files-or-why-should-they-be-killed-off-sooner-rather-than-later [3] - http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2009/07/06/identifying-pointless-la-files-for-plugins [4] - http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2009/09/28/removing-la-files-for-dum-w-uncertain-people [5] - http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_11.html#SEC11 [6] - http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_68.html#SEC68 [7] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/asneeded.xml [8] - http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Libtool_archives#shared_build [9] - http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Overlinking - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMzPFhAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPw84P/i8tpOguja80XDIpB68ewgcU O2lRYlvVA8LRPbcl2pBXnefHH4BtO2h1AHhjlOBO3upu/RGdP7IFR0Q5T8DLKr3O UZLoK4oGxYct053Ehp1WP2zhtQaRcDUcBzyyPEr7YdVl9oTud1dHplcojx/jas3r H3aXhBkMVE1s2PUXUfrLMz5WqAlSpDxkk+LVpWe6cvMjsZ2BqclYNXGKcKjldx0l GzzJO+nSyeFQ/Udn4dEO60ORhX6/2G9cGnBCWWDVAuTuht1+i6M8LxtJwVYlOg+c JQ1P9PFq6zLgNGOE122Bgzox+7wMPwsh+ja54mg6XK2YjeQ1jOGTLAitwwqL9BOk isCS0VTkzBhvJcOqzatVMGt/iDBa8zXOItl1nX3PQPnw07SsxqGGsZJWj8+gf0o0 heY9tbFnSMvMwVd7gKSpq80NVZ4mSlfZXKWkUWgatg3OLXF+A7sJhAxA16K9TU9x BaNADGfizC33z4JRLUNrtcocNoVFQWr6/OGybAkAn2JKGHEOuvhmupQET0b0qf18 qsG6unuv7DX93uCNkKxL+9qhghO8E3I1BWlecTXhdPJiD0cisxgYnoFrZ/F9aHbl FlYytKUH3bCiLuKy1RmkAG+YRjH4vYyIe9tTM+brBvU/NAJpbN4b36oUmOmj8Kdv JmT/C5sBOes+5QEV3X49 =czVz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files: wording about when and how to drop .la files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi. As outlined in the global email about this issue, this email is to start a thread about the wording on when and how to drop .la files. Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about this point. 2. Get a consensus about the wording of when it's appropriate and how it's appropriate to remove the .la files As agreed in the meeting, as a first draft, we have that "the motion is to drop la files, when appropriate, through the use of a function in eutils that will only be called if the static-libs use flag is not set or unless the package relies on pkg-config". In the meantime there were some concerns raised about some prefix arches and therefore there's a suggestion we use a hidden variable (not to be set by users) to control the removal of the files so that we can "mask" running the function on any profile where we can't drop the .la files. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMzPD1AAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPPZIP/j1zlxRQtPzq/sh9JpzR2yDg wZsJR9F6+JzszWwlH/GGkIvATVv0GlNE5weDqzkcwMVjQuXN+MV/DIZ0/Nk7Tz/D bDUjIankpC/Ngq0Qt1WUJ5M3NmdFD0PV2L1SsdgnMuphFGSOf95oGBHEUZL5GHM8 U6vY8VtRB14MFqS94vwE2T4Txj45X1k3K2r/oRagW5KAa8AeYXFSTV2bcW4+0Fjq A9lZ3sn1pIeCT0QMFraAuX952wMx4U/sA5L1eYf0b4LsHWr+1S4Krhx1v87iYQK+ AnR42RwQOw9uNTN1n+/ubMZ1bJQS4zQFloGyTtCDu1DDOy3pkomKIFr3YaATq4Dj mpbYI/LG12S2yPx/gqts6ncMiEbHHsI6z4SnDLvSfy1To2RFdpHIjFDGPslWndu2 TtED8QukmzOUGjQl8poWiBhIvPnV2w2P9ZetktSgOiLsCmT9jzAgtodZW01LLaDl 6HJETOSfvgb9oEObJiPtSWBFnu6OmvgGg82sfRPrzUiGtWO1x81eoGvOtXQpO2Bv odgFGvkPkgAI7DDms6Nr2aaylVKOp5waSGnl6dkvLuDhTCFwPIvHDliDO7yOtuNJ B0pZSSkoZPJa2Ydc/HESyCoiZjFY3Y2pVtgx8MFtgXAk+c0Ip9fs4RWoGSVpucUp P8zEfxXj+F6MidciUIig =Cncg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files: eutils function
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
As outlined in the global email about this issue, this email is to start
a thread about the eutils function. Please reply to this thread if you
have any comments about this point.
1. Add a function to eutils to deal with the removal of the .la files.
delete_libtool_archives() { find "${@:$D}" -name '*.la' -delete }
That function was suggested by Diego, but Arfrever has argued that we
should replace : with - as '"${@:$D}" expands to a subarray containing
elements starting with element with index $D (where element 0 is $0)'.
The point in having this function in eutils is to ensure we use a
consistent way to address the .la files. This will also make it much
easier to adapt or review this function if needed.
- --
Regards,
Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=bYty
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo's plan to remove .la files
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
As decided in the last council's meeting, following the recent
discussions about .la files removal, I'm sending an email to this list
with a proposal for a plan to address this issue.
My proposal for the plan is the following:
1. Add a function to eutils to deal with the removal of the .la files.
delete_libtool_archives() { find "${@:$D}" -name '*.la' -delete }
That function was suggested by Diego, but Arfrever has argued that we
should replace : with - as '"${@:$D}" expands to a subarray containing
elements starting with element with index $D (where element 0 is $0)'.
The point in having this function in eutils is to ensure we use a
consistent way to address the .la files. This will also make it much
easier to adapt or review this function if needed.
2. Get a consensus about the wording of when it's appropriate and how
it's appropriate to remove the .la files
As agreed in the meeting, as a first draft, we have that "the motion is
to drop la files, when appropriate, through the use of a function in
eutils that will only be called if the static-libs use flag is not set
or unless the package relies on pkg-config".
In the meantime there were some concerns raised about some prefix arches
and therefore there's a suggestion we use a hidden variable (not to be
set by users) to control the removal of the files so that we can "mask"
running the function on any profile where we can't drop the .la files.
3. Add a page to the QA project space (unless they're not interested)
about la files and how to deal with them
I think we can ask Diego to use large parts of his blog posts and charts
about .la files[1], [2], [3], [4] as a source for the document. We can
also add some basic info from the autobook[5], [6]. The goal would be to
have a document similar to our own --as-needed guide [7] and to other
distributions[8], [9].
Anyone wishes to volunteer for this task?
QA would such a document be welcomed in your project space?
4. Add the news item about pending .la files removal, pointing to 3 and
with instructions to run lafilefixer and explaining how portage-2.1.9*
addresses this issue.
We can base the news item in the existing proposal for this[10].
5. Get portage-2.1.9* marked stable.
As this portage version will fix the contents of the .la files when
installing them, it will prevent the trouble caused by the hard-coded
lib references - for all the .la files that will still need to be installed.
One issue that remains open to me, is whether there will be any control
over this feature. I was told the plan is to have it dependent on
FEATURES, which to me doesn't make much sense.
6. allow maintainers to work on .la files removal as they see fit
After we provide maintainers consistent tools to remove .la files,
create some good documentation about this, get a stable version of
portage that helps addressing the issue for newly installed packages
and warn users, maintainers are free to work on this as they can.
[1] - http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/04/14/whatabout-those-la-files
[2] -
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/07/02/again-about-la-files-or-why-should-they-be-killed-off-sooner-rather-than-later
[3] -
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2009/07/06/identifying-pointless-la-files-for-plugins
[4] -
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2009/09/28/removing-la-files-for-dum-w-uncertain-people
[5] - http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_11.html#SEC11
[6] - http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_68.html#SEC68
[7] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/asneeded.xml
[8] - http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Libtool_archives#shared_build
[9] - http://wiki.mandriva.com/en/Overlinking
[10] -
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_c65fd55a78f1418178689df822a25638.xml
Please reply if you have any suggestions or warnings about this plan and
or any of the points.
I'm going to send one email for each point in this plan. Please send any
replies about the plan to this thread and to each of the points to the
respective threads.
- --
Regards,
Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in server profiles
On 10/30/2010 08:10 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > If i remember it right, the server profile was created for those people, who > only want a minimum > amount of default profile enabled USE flags (so no desktop profile because of > that), but on the > other side dont want to do the additional work/checks/reading for hardened > profiles (which have much > less profile enabled USE flags, but also have the special gcc, glibc and > Kernel), basicly a profile, > which does the same as hardened profile without the specific hardened bits. > > Isn't this essentially what the default profile is? Basically server is just default + USE="apache2 ldap mysql snmp truetype xml". Hmm, which of those flags is not like the others? Maybe it is needed for a use-dependency/etc. It seems like a not-quite-minimal and definitely not all-in-one set of features. I could see if this were some kind of run-your-whole-network appliance that threw in everything from DNS to mail to asterisk, and with a canned set of integrated configuration files for turnkey operation. I could see if we just stuck with the minimal default profile. I just don't get having a LAMP box without the P, but with ldap and snmp - oh, and truetype... Rich
[gentoo-dev] Last rites: dev-cpp/gtkmm:2
# Pacho Ramos (30 Oct 2010) # Build failures (bug 244543) and not required by # anything in the tree. # Pending Removal: 2010-11-30 =dev-cpp/gtkmm-2.2.12 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-analyzer/tcpreplay: ChangeLog tcpreplay-3.4.5_beta2.ebuild
Jeroen Roovers posted on Sat, 30 Oct 2010 19:40:45 +0200 as excerpted: > On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:44:42 +0400 > Peter Volkov wrote: > >> Also speaking about this specific package: I've maintained this package >> quite long time and I'm following upstream mailing list and I've never >> heard from upstream it's safe to push betas on all users. > > I didn't push it on all users. Maybe ~arch users, but they get to keep > the pieces when they break their systems, if I recall correctly. To some extent, yes. However, Gentoo policy has always been that even ~arch is only upstream- stable packages, the ~arch keyword denoting Gentoo package testing (basically, the ebuild script and dependencies), /not/ upstream testing. In with certain exceptions, in particular for packages where Gentoo itself is upstream, if it's not a package that could at least in theory be Gentoo- stable if no bugs appear during the 30-day standard stabilizing period, it's not supposed to be ~arch keyworded either. That's an important distinction to make. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in net-analyzer/tcpreplay: ChangeLog tcpreplay-3.4.5_beta2.ebuild
On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 09:44:42 +0400 Peter Volkov wrote: > Also speaking about this specific package: I've maintained this > package quite long time and I'm following upstream mailing list and > I've never heard from upstream it's safe to push betas on all users. I didn't push it on all users. Maybe ~arch users, but they get to keep the pieces when they break their systems, if I recall correctly. jer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrite: LinNeighborhood and mondo
On L, 2010-10-30 at 11:22 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: > # Samuli Suominen (30 Oct 2010) > # Still using GTK+-1.2 > # Masked for removal in 30 days > net-misc/LinNeighborhood What are the alternatives? Nautilus and Thunar? I guess the suggestion is to mention in the mask message what could be used instead. > # Samuli Suominen (30 Oct 2010) > # For Linux 2.4, bug 335455. Time to upgrade to 2.6. > # Masked for removal in 30 days > sys-apps/mondo -- Mart Raudsepp Gentoo Developer Mail: l...@gentoo.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in server profiles
Am 30.10.2010 03:37, schrieb Donnie Berkholz: > On 15:46 Fri 29 Oct , Thomas Sachau wrote: >> Which raises the question, if those people, who want to install a >> minimal server will mostly use apache or something different. And >> especially for minimal setups, i dont think that apache will be the >> first choice, so i agree with the removal of those USE flags from >> default IUSE. The profile is intended to have a minimal set of flags, >> i would call apache an additional optional flag, not a default option >> for minimal server setups. > > I'm not sure when this transition happened, as profile USE flags have > traditionally been a reasonable default set rather than a minimal set. > This gives people who don't have much experience with Gentoo a decent > chance at getting a working system on their first try. For people who > have more experience, it's not exactly difficult to change things. > If i remember it right, the server profile was created for those people, who only want a minimum amount of default profile enabled USE flags (so no desktop profile because of that), but on the other side dont want to do the additional work/checks/reading for hardened profiles (which have much less profile enabled USE flags, but also have the special gcc, glibc and Kernel), basicly a profile, which does the same as hardened profile without the specific hardened bits. -- Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Reminder: please coordinate with the "subsystem maintainers"
Hi all, While it is true we don't have real subsystem maintainers in Gentoo, I'd like to ask everybody to shoot a request to the team maintaining a general area before adding something that might fall into their development usage. In the past year I have witnessed a number of breakages due to adding support for, or entirely new packages, to big subsystem such as Ruby, XFCE, PAM, and so on. In the case of Ruby, we've been working hard to make Ruby-NG[1] perform just as fine as RubyGems, but to do so we need to add custom code to the ebuilds, and set up running tests and the like. This also means that dependencies need to be done sometimes in tricky ways; so if you want to add an ebuild for Ruby-related software, please clear it with us first. In the case of XFCE, I'll let Samuli talk about that. In the case of PAM, I'm now (very slowly) running an audit of what we have in tree [2] and I've found at least two partly-broken modules that have been recently added to the tree. Since I'm maintaining PAM more or less alone right now, and I'm just working on the new pambase code, I'd pretty much like to know and validate ebuilds for new PAM modules and PAM-using software _before_ they hit the tree, as the audit is already complex enough on its own. [1] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/tag/rubyng [2] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/10/24/anybody-hiring-me-for-pam -- Diego Elio Pettenò — “Flameeyes” http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in server profiles
On 10/30/2010 05:09 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 10:05:17AM +0400, Peter Volkov wrote: >> В Птн, 29/10/2010 в 09:11 -0700, Alec Warner пишет: >>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:21 AM, Markos Chandras >>> wrote: >>> Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-ldap, but >>> still get ldap + pam working? >>> Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-apache, but >>> still get apache + php working? apache + rails? >>> How many packages support each USE flag? >>> How many of those packages have IUSE defaults for +ldap or +apache already? >> >> Having lxc/openvz/vserver technologies at hand it's not rare to split >> LAMP server into a number of virtual servers (containers): mysql / >> backend with php / frontend / smtp - everything sits in its own >> container. And USE=apache will be used only in _one_ container. Also not >> all servers are web servers. So IMO server profile should be just >> minimal profile that hints users that this profile will stay minimal and >> usable for all kinds of servers. That said I think server profile is >> useless and for servers I maintain my own profiles. >> >> -- >> Peter. >> >> > Exactly! How about the warning message. Should the statement about > gcc+glibc be removed and keep the one about hardened but make it a bit > different?Like "This profile is making use of a minimal set of use flag. > You may find it useful in a server environment. However, If you are seeking > for extra security, please check the Hardened project > (http://hardened.gentoo.org)." > What exactly is the intended use of the server flag? When I want a minimal image, I usually just use the default profile. That is pretty-much a bare-bones gentoo install. I can see the use of desktop, and I can see the use of hardened. Right now server just looks like default with random stuff for various kinds of servers added. I could see if server had a different set of keywords and QA policy (like debian stable), or if there were a set of use flags that would be universally useful on a server and not on a desktop. Right now it just seems like the server profile exists since lots of other distros have server editions, so we should too. If that is the case, why not just point users to the default profile, or hardened?' I'd be curious what the users of the server profile say. If anything they are the ones we should be listening to since they've found a use for it. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gentoo-x86/net-misc/aggregate: aggregate-1.6.ebuild
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:30:55AM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 28-10-2010 09:25:23 +, Samuli Suominen wrote: > > ssuominen10/10/28 09:25:23 > > > > Modified: aggregate-1.6.ebuild > > Log: > > qa > > I think it would be good practice if you would give a summary of > what type of QA you applied, even though for you it may be obvious. > I just see lots of unnecessary changes that are apparently considered to > be justified by "QA". As the maintainer of the package in question, I'd like to ask: If you're changing a package I maintain, put SOMETHING in the Changelog. Secondly, I'm wondering if this should have been a revbump: your addition of tc-export could have changed the results. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] Should we remove dev-tinyos category due to lack of maintainer?
On 10/30/2010 10:56 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > Packages from dev-tinyos/ category have been slowly lastrited due to > open QA issues during last year (or two). > > 17 open bugs, http://tinyurl.com/33h7fny > > I remember someone suggesting this before, but I can't seem to find the > mail or IRC log about it, so asking now again. Well, masked. Can be changed if someone has objections... # Samuli Suominen (30 Oct 2010) # Uninstallable for over a year now, bug 276203 # Removal in 30 days dev-scheme/sisc # Samuli Suominen (30 Oct 2010) # Unmaintained, 17 open bugs, http://tinyurl.com/33h7fny # dev-tinyos category will be removed in 30 days dev-tinyos/channelgen dev-tinyos/listen dev-tinyos/nesc dev-tinyos/serial-forwarder dev-tinyos/tos dev-tinyos/tos-getenv
Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in server profiles
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 10:05:17AM +0400, Peter Volkov wrote: > В Птн, 29/10/2010 в 09:11 -0700, Alec Warner пишет: > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:21 AM, Markos Chandras > > wrote: > > Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-ldap, but > > still get ldap + pam working? > > Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-apache, but > > still get apache + php working? apache + rails? > > How many packages support each USE flag? > > How many of those packages have IUSE defaults for +ldap or +apache already? > > Having lxc/openvz/vserver technologies at hand it's not rare to split > LAMP server into a number of virtual servers (containers): mysql / > backend with php / frontend / smtp - everything sits in its own > container. And USE=apache will be used only in _one_ container. Also not > all servers are web servers. So IMO server profile should be just > minimal profile that hints users that this profile will stay minimal and > usable for all kinds of servers. That said I think server profile is > useless and for servers I maintain my own profiles. > > -- > Peter. > > Exactly! How about the warning message. Should the statement about gcc+glibc be removed and keep the one about hardened but make it a bit different?Like "This profile is making use of a minimal set of use flag. You may find it useful in a server environment. However, If you are seeking for extra security, please check the Hardened project (http://hardened.gentoo.org)." -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410 pgpxhbvu58S4K.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Lastrite: LinNeighborhood and mondo
# Samuli Suominen (30 Oct 2010) # Still using GTK+-1.2 # Masked for removal in 30 days net-misc/LinNeighborhood # Samuli Suominen (30 Oct 2010) # For Linux 2.4, bug 335455. Time to upgrade to 2.6. # Masked for removal in 30 days sys-apps/mondo
[gentoo-dev] Should we remove dev-tinyos category due to lack of maintainer?
Packages from dev-tinyos/ category have been slowly lastrited due to open QA issues during last year (or two). 17 open bugs, http://tinyurl.com/33h7fny I remember someone suggesting this before, but I can't seem to find the mail or IRC log about it, so asking now again.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Changes in server profiles
В Птн, 29/10/2010 в 09:11 -0700, Alec Warner пишет: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:21 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: > Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-ldap, but > still get ldap + pam working? > Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-apache, but > still get apache + php working? apache + rails? > How many packages support each USE flag? > How many of those packages have IUSE defaults for +ldap or +apache already? Having lxc/openvz/vserver technologies at hand it's not rare to split LAMP server into a number of virtual servers (containers): mysql / backend with php / frontend / smtp - everything sits in its own container. And USE=apache will be used only in _one_ container. Also not all servers are web servers. So IMO server profile should be just minimal profile that hints users that this profile will stay minimal and usable for all kinds of servers. That said I think server profile is useless and for servers I maintain my own profiles. -- Peter.
