On 12 July 2012 21:51, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/07/12 07:41 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
On 12 July 2012 17:52, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Ben de Groot
yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'd like to commit the following news item on 2012-07-21. Any comments?
--
Eray Aslan e...@gentoo.org
Title: Upgrading to postfix-2.9
Author: Eray Aslan e...@gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2012-07-17
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: mail-mta/postfix-2.9
On Tuesday 17 July 2012 13:19:25 Eray Aslan wrote:
I'd like to commit the following news item on 2012-07-21. Any comments?
Imho, no need a news for it.
emerge -DuN world;revdep-rebuild;dispatch-conf is what you normally do.
--
Agostino Sarubbo / ago -at- gentoo.org
Gentoo/AMD64 Arch Security
On 07/17/2012 01:34 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
Imho, no need a news for it.
emerge -DuN world;revdep-rebuild;dispatch-conf is what you normally do.
Well, the sysadmin runs dispatch-conf, a new daemon_directory setting
comes up and he goes WTF? I am trying to avoid that WTF moment.
There was
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Eray Aslan e...@gentoo.org wrote:
Well, the sysadmin runs dispatch-conf, a new daemon_directory setting
comes up and he goes WTF? I am trying to avoid that WTF moment.
There was a few complaints in gentoo-user ML and a bug report when it
was introduced to
On 07/17/2012 02:00 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
It may be a small issue, but since the potential pain is quite large,
Yes, that's the idea.
since postfix config file changes are usually
pretty hard to review for merges.
Hmm, that's a failure on our part. =postfix-2.9 ebuilds is better in
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:21:07 +0300
Eray Aslan e...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/17/2012 02:00 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
It may be a small issue, but since the potential pain is quite
large,
Yes, that's the idea.
Considering Postfix is an MTA that is commonly used in production
Nathan Zachary posted on Tue, 17 Jul 2012 07:29:52 -0400 as excerpted:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:21:07 +0300 Eray Aslan e...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 07/17/2012 02:00 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
It may be a small issue, but since the potential pain is quite large,
Yes, that's the idea.
On 07/17/12 07:21, Eray Aslan wrote:
On 07/17/2012 02:00 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
It may be a small issue, but since the potential pain is quite large,
Yes, that's the idea.
since postfix config file changes are usually
pretty hard to review for merges.
Hmm, that's a failure on our
On 17.07.2012 16:49, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
After changing these for years, I finally realized that the defaults are
correct:
# postconf -d readme_directory html_directory
readme_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.8.9/readme
html_directory = /usr/share/doc/postfix-2.8.9/html
Do we
On 07/17/2012 05:49 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
Do we really need to include them in main.cf?
Yes, as long as we want the docs under /usr/share/doc/${PF}/ - the
Gentoo norm. Alternative might be not to install the readme|html files
via the doc USE flag.
Not that I mind, but this is getting
Dear Everyone,
An often cited benefit of the /usr merge is the ability to put
everything but /etc on NFS and for that reason, we need to force an
initramfs on people happily using /usr without it.
Interestingly, the /usr merge changes made to genkernel permit us to
mount /etc from a
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
I have also been told that the /usr merge is necessary because upstream
will force it on us. Interestingly, most of @system on Gentoo Linux is
GNU software, which would need to stop supporting things in / in order
for that to
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:20:13PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
An often cited benefit of the /usr merge is the ability to put
everything but /etc on NFS and for that reason, we need to force an
initramfs on people happily using /usr without it.
This is not quite correct. The initramfs is
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 18:41 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
If somebody really is pushing for an all-out /usr move by all means
speak up, but I think that basically what everybody is advocating is
trying to follow upstream for individual packages.
As I've been saying for a while, doing a full
William Hubbs wrote:
This is not quite correct. The initramfs is required because of [1].
William
Where is [1]?
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how
you interpreted my words!
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:41:26PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
In any case, it sounds like for now some devs are continuing to adjust
ebuilds to keep a separate /usr working as well as possible, though it
apparently breaks in some edge cases right now without an initramfs,
as you've already
On 07/17/2012 07:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 05:20:13PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
An often cited benefit of the /usr merge is the ability to put
everything but /etc on NFS and for that reason, we need to force an
initramfs on people happily using /usr without it.
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:13:06PM -0500, Dale wrote:
William Hubbs wrote:
This is not quite correct. The initramfs is required because of [1].
William
Where is [1]?
[1] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
We have a way around this in some
William Hubbs wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:13:06PM -0500, Dale wrote:
William Hubbs wrote:
This is not quite correct. The initramfs is required because of [1].
William
Where is [1]?
[1] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
We have a way around
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:19:48PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
On 07/17/2012 07:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
This is basically not relevant since we do not support HURD.
It is relevant because it guarantees that the GNU stuff in @system will
continue working. That allows us to narrow our focus
On 2012-07-17, at 7:07 PM, Olivier Crête tes...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm sure most people can't
even explain the difference between them.
/sbin is for bins that only root should be able to run. easy. :)
On 07/17/2012 08:12 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
Lastly, don't tell me to read systemd's case for why we should break
people's systems. I have read it and I find it flawed. There is
absolutely no need for us to make this change.
Without elaboration on why you find their case flawed, this sounds
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote:
I have yet to see any convincing reason to do this other than RedHat is
doing it. This change will not make Gentoo a better distribution and it
is simply not worth the pain. Some people appear to think that this is
an urgent
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 20:37 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 2012-07-17, at 7:07 PM, Olivier Crête tes...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm sure most people can't
even explain the difference between them.
/sbin is for bins that only root should be able to run. easy. :)
Except when it isn't the
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 20:37 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 2012-07-17, at 7:07 PM, Olivier Crête tes...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm sure most people can't
even explain the difference between them.
/sbin is for bins that only root should be able to run. easy. :)
Or you can try this
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 08:37:03PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 2012-07-17, at 7:07 PM, Olivier Crête tes...@gentoo.org wrote:
I'm sure most people can't
even explain the difference between them.
/sbin is for bins that only root should be able to run. easy. :)
Not quite,
On 07/17/2012 08:46 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
If we don't do anything, then lots of stuff moves to /usr. I think
that is what you're missing. The /usr move basically starts happening
on its own automatically if we DON'T do much. This is because
upstream is the one pushing it.
Which upstream
On 17 July 2012 21:17, Richard Yao r...@cs.stonybrook.edu wrote:
On 07/17/2012 08:46 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
If we don't do anything, then lots of stuff moves to /usr. I think
that is what you're missing. The /usr move basically starts happening
on its own automatically if we DON'T do much.
On 07/17/2012 09:28 PM, Jeff Horelick wrote:
On 17 July 2012 21:17, Richard Yao r...@cs.stonybrook.edu wrote:
On 07/17/2012 08:46 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
If we don't do anything, then lots of stuff moves to /usr. I think
that is what you're missing. The /usr move basically starts happening
On 07/17/2012 07:07 PM, Olivier Crête wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 18:41 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
If somebody really is pushing for an all-out /usr move by all means
speak up, but I think that basically what everybody is advocating is
trying to follow upstream for individual packages.
As
Richard Yao posted on Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:20:13 -0400 as excerpted:
The only thing that might require a merge is systemd and it is not in
@system. If we offered users the ability to choose rc systems, we would
still be supporting baselayout-1's rc system. If we start now, we should
bring that
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 23:54 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
On 07/17/2012 07:07 PM, Olivier Crête wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 18:41 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
If somebody really is pushing for an all-out /usr move by all means
speak up, but I think that basically what everybody is advocating is
On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 23:24 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
GNOME is part of the GNU project, so we should be safe unless they
decide against portability. OpenSuSe and Mageia are other distributions,
so they are not upstream for us.
With my GNOME hat on:
GNOME does not take any marching orders from
All:
Sending this here before I send to the gentoo-dev list. Below is the
list of packages that are managed by the tools-portage herd and their
maintainer (if any). I know we have several packages in the herd that
are not being maintained and I would like to either get a maintainer or
last rite
35 matches
Mail list logo
