Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC v2: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Walter Dnes]

> Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-6.4.0

[...snip...]

> Switching the profile modifies the use-flags of GCC 6 to generate
> PIE executables by default; thus, you need to do the rebuilds
> even if you already used GCC 6 beforehand.
> 
> If you do not follow these steps you may get spurious build
> failures when the linker tries unsuccessfully to combine non-PIE
> and PIE code.
> =

  I'm on 6.3.0 on x86, which is currently unstable on *ALL* arches, and
"emerge -pv =sys-devel/gcc-6.3.0" shows "(-pie)".  Two questions...

1) Will 6.3.0 be skipped for stabilization?

2) If someone decides to override and set "-pie" in USE, will their
current systems continue to function?  On a new install I'll go with
the default, but "emerge -e" takes a long time on my current machine.
It's an ancient 2008 CORE2 with 3 gigs of ram, but it works fine for
me, including Youtube 1080P streaming.

-- 
Walter Dnes 
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC v2: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Alec Warner]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:

> Alec Warner posted on Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:28:41 -0400 as excerpted:
>
> >> Please consider switching from your current 13.0 profile to the
> >> corresponding 17.0 profile soon after GCC 6.4.0 has been stabilized on
> >> your architecture. The 13.0 profiles will be deprecated and removed in
> >> the near future.
> >>
> >>
> > Can you commit to a deadline on this?
> >
> > Its OK to be wrong (e.g. say 1 month but remove in 3); but "near future"
> > is not actionable by readers.
>
> Will the 13.0 profiles be removed all together, or per-arch?
>
> If they're removed all at the same time, then the time-limiting factor
> will certainly be how long it takes the last arch to stabilize gcc-6.4+,
> something that's likely not entirely predictable but that might take some
> time, given gentoo's known issues with straggling archs.
>

> If the existing profiles will be deprecated and removed per-arch, with
> some fixed time after gcc-6.4+ stabilizes on that arch as a goal, then
> the time for most popular and best maintained archs may be predicted now,
> but the time will differ for each one, so the best that could be done
> would be either a time range or a list of the known ones, with presently
> unknowns being added to the list in further revisions of the news item.
>

So my point isn't to be pedantic (that is why I said its OK to be
incorrect.)

"In the near future" to me could mean:

1) tomorrow
2) next week
3) next month
4) next quarter

If we wrote:

"The 13.0 profiles will be removed in six weeks, upgrade before then." Its
clear to the reader that
they should schedule this effort before the six weeks is up. It matters
less if the six weeks is true; the email
sets expectations regardless of the truth.

We could rewrite it further to avoid the pedantry and say:

"Please upgrade away from the 13.0 profiles in the next six weeks."

This also sets expectations for readers, but avoids any specific guarantee
around when Gentoo developers actually delete the 13.0 profiles.
The reality of when the work is done matters significantly less than the
expectation setting (as you imply there will likely be unknowable delays in
deprecation and so forth, but users shouldn't take that as an opportunity
to delay upgrades.)



>
> The other alternative might be to word it something like (1 year can be 6
> months or whatever instead, if that works better):
>
> "13.0 profiles are set to be removed one year after the last arch
> stabilizes gcc-6.4+, with the goal for the gcc stabilization being the
> end of 2017, meaning 13.0 profile removal is planned for the end of 2018
> if all archs meet their gcc-6.4+ stabilization goal."
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC v2: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Duncan]

Alec Warner posted on Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:28:41 -0400 as excerpted:

>> Please consider switching from your current 13.0 profile to the
>> corresponding 17.0 profile soon after GCC 6.4.0 has been stabilized on
>> your architecture. The 13.0 profiles will be deprecated and removed in
>> the near future.
>>
>>
> Can you commit to a deadline on this?
> 
> Its OK to be wrong (e.g. say 1 month but remove in 3); but "near future"
> is not actionable by readers.

Will the 13.0 profiles be removed all together, or per-arch?

If they're removed all at the same time, then the time-limiting factor 
will certainly be how long it takes the last arch to stabilize gcc-6.4+, 
something that's likely not entirely predictable but that might take some 
time, given gentoo's known issues with straggling archs.

If the existing profiles will be deprecated and removed per-arch, with 
some fixed time after gcc-6.4+ stabilizes on that arch as a goal, then 
the time for most popular and best maintained archs may be predicted now, 
but the time will differ for each one, so the best that could be done 
would be either a time range or a list of the known ones, with presently  
unknowns being added to the list in further revisions of the news item.

The other alternative might be to word it something like (1 year can be 6 
months or whatever instead, if that works better):

"13.0 profiles are set to be removed one year after the last arch 
stabilizes gcc-6.4+, with the goal for the gcc stabilization being the 
end of 2017, meaning 13.0 profile removal is planned for the end of 2018 
if all archs meet their gcc-6.4+ stabilization goal."

-- 
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

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Duncan]

Andreas K. Huettel posted on Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:02:32 +0200 as excerpted:

> Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017, 04:10:13 CEST schrieb Duncan:
> 
>> One thing isn't clear here.  Is this sequence necessary due to the
>> profile switch itself, because the /profile/ enables PIE by default, or
>> is it gcc-6.4+ that enables PIE, and the profile simply forces the PIE
>> default by forcing gcc-6.4+?
> 
> Switching the profile changes the settings for building gcc (it switches
> a use-flag from forced-off to forced-on). A gcc-6 built with the 17.0
> profiles will produce PIE executables by default, a gcc-6 built with
> the 13.0 profiles will not.
> 
> I've added this paragraph:
> # Switching the profile modifies the settings of GCC 6 to generate
> # PIE executables by default; thus, you need to do the rebuilds
> # even if you already used GCC 6 beforehand.

Thanks.  Much clearer now. =:^)

(And I'll have some rebuilding to do.)

-- 
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

[gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs: app-backup/backupninja

[Jonas Stein]

Dear all,

The following packages are up for grabs:

app-backup/backupninja

after retirement of the proxied maintainer.

A user provided a new ebuild (still needs some work...)
https://bugs.gentoo.org/578068

backupninja is available in many other distributions it would be nice to
keep it in a good state:
https://repology.org/metapackage/backupninja/versions

-- 
Best,
Jonas

















signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Nils Freydank]

Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017, 20:56:32 CEST schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017, 01:15:42 CEST schrieb Magnus Granberg:
> > 3) Hardened profiles will be moved to the 17.0 profile as sub profile.
> 
> Are there any special switching instructions for hardened that we need to
> add?
As far as I know hardened had the PIE enabled at least for a while, but it is 
possible to switch to a non-PIE subprofile via gcc-config for gcc <6.

It looks to me as there isn’t any emtytree world rebuild necessary, as long as 
someone comes from hardened with PIE enabled.
-- 
GPG fingerprint: '766B 8122 1342 6912 3401 492A 8B54 D7A3 FF3C DB17'
Holgersson

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

[gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs: net-misc/slimrat

[Jonas Stein]

Dear all,

The following packages are up for grabs:

net-misc/slimrat

after retirement of the proxied maintainer.

This tool has only a - ebuild, several QA warnings and relies on the
obsolete google repository.
I think it needs some care, or should get last rites soon.

-- 
Best,
Jonas

















signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs: dev-python/wsgilog

[Jonas Stein]

Dear all,

The following packages are up for grabs:

dev-python/wsgilog

after retirement of the proxied maintainer.

If you are interested, you can try to bump simply to
dev-python/wsgilog-0.3.1

https://bugs.gentoo.org/633982

-- 
Best,
Jonas

















signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC v2: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Alec Warner]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Andreas K. Huettel 
wrote:

> =
> Title: New 17.0 profiles in the Gentoo repository
> Author: Andreas K. Hüttel 
> Posted: xxx
> Revision: 1
> News-Item-Format: 2.0
> Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-6.4.0
>
> We have just added a new set of profiles with release version 17.0
> to the Gentoo repository. These bring three changes:
> 1) The default C++ language version for applications is now C++14.
>This change is mostly relevant to Gentoo developers. It also
>means, however, that compilers earlier than GCC 6 are masked
>and not supported for use as a system compiler anymore. Feel
>free to unmask them if you need them for specific applications.
> 2) Where supported, GCC will now build position-independent
>executables (PIE) by default. This improves the overall
>security fingerprint. The switch from non-PIE to PIE binaries,
>however, requires some steps by users, as detailed below.
> 3) Up to now, hardened profiles were separate from the default
>profile tree. Now they are moving into the 17.0 profile
>as a feature there, similar to "no-multilib" and "systemd".
>
> Please consider switching from your current 13.0 profile to the
> corresponding 17.0 profile soon after GCC 6.4.0 has been
> stabilized on your architecture. The 13.0 profiles will be deprecated
> and removed in the near future.
>

Can you commit to a deadline on this?

Its OK to be wrong (e.g. say 1 month but remove in 3); but "near future" is
not actionable by readers.


>
> Switching involves the following steps:
> If not already done,
> * Use gcc-config to select gcc-6.4.0 (or later) as system compiler
> * Re-source /etc/profile:
> . /etc/profile
> * Re-emerge libtool
> Then,
> * Select the new profile with eselect
> * Re-emerge, in this sequence, the selected gcc, binutils, and glibc
> emerge -1 sys-devel/gcc:6.4.0
> emerge -1 sys-devel/binutils
> emerge -1 sys-libs/glibc
> * Rebuild your entire system
> emerge -e world
>
> Switching the profile modifies the use-flags of GCC 6 to generate
> PIE executables by default; thus, you need to do the rebuilds
> even if you already used GCC 6 beforehand.
>
> If you do not follow these steps you may get spurious build
> failures when the linker tries unsuccessfully to combine non-PIE
> and PIE code.
> =
>
>
>
> --
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> dilfri...@gentoo.org
> Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

[gentoo-dev] RFC v2: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Andreas K. Huettel]

=
Title: New 17.0 profiles in the Gentoo repository
Author: Andreas K. Hüttel 
Posted: xxx
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 2.0
Display-If-Installed: >=sys-devel/gcc-6.4.0

We have just added a new set of profiles with release version 17.0
to the Gentoo repository. These bring three changes:
1) The default C++ language version for applications is now C++14.
   This change is mostly relevant to Gentoo developers. It also
   means, however, that compilers earlier than GCC 6 are masked
   and not supported for use as a system compiler anymore. Feel
   free to unmask them if you need them for specific applications.
2) Where supported, GCC will now build position-independent
   executables (PIE) by default. This improves the overall
   security fingerprint. The switch from non-PIE to PIE binaries,
   however, requires some steps by users, as detailed below.
3) Up to now, hardened profiles were separate from the default
   profile tree. Now they are moving into the 17.0 profile
   as a feature there, similar to "no-multilib" and "systemd".

Please consider switching from your current 13.0 profile to the
corresponding 17.0 profile soon after GCC 6.4.0 has been
stabilized on your architecture. The 13.0 profiles will be deprecated
and removed in the near future.

Switching involves the following steps:
If not already done,
* Use gcc-config to select gcc-6.4.0 (or later) as system compiler
* Re-source /etc/profile:
. /etc/profile
* Re-emerge libtool
Then,
* Select the new profile with eselect
* Re-emerge, in this sequence, the selected gcc, binutils, and glibc
emerge -1 sys-devel/gcc:6.4.0
emerge -1 sys-devel/binutils
emerge -1 sys-libs/glibc
* Rebuild your entire system
emerge -e world

Switching the profile modifies the use-flags of GCC 6 to generate
PIE executables by default; thus, you need to do the rebuilds
even if you already used GCC 6 beforehand.

If you do not follow these steps you may get spurious build
failures when the linker tries unsuccessfully to combine non-PIE
and PIE code.
=



-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017, 09:51:43 CEST schrieb Kent Fredric:
> 
> Are there any specific versions of toolchain modules that should/must be
> used in 17.0 to make it work with GCC-6.4.0?
> 

Not that I know of. I'd use most recent stable though.

(And glibc-2.25 will most likely become stable before gcc-6.)

> All I did was:
> - Forcibly create the profile symlink myself ( as its not visible to me
>   yet with eselect )
> - accept-keywords for gcc
> - Followed remaining instructions.
> And hopefully that should be sufficient.

That should be perfectly fine.

> 
> binutils: 2.28.1
> gcc: 6.4.0
> glibc: 2.23-r4
> libtool: 2.4.6-r3

> I know this is typically a "don't mix ~arch and arch" thing, but I
> can't actually test things that will break otherwise :p

The whole "don't mix ~arch and arch" credo is in my opinion a bit silly. If 
mixing leads to bugs, these should be documented and fixed, if only with a 
version dependency.

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017, 04:10:13 CEST schrieb Duncan:

> One thing isn't clear here.  Is this sequence necessary due to the
> profile switch itself, because the /profile/ enables PIE by default, or
> is it gcc-6.4+ that enables PIE, and the profile simply forces the PIE
> default by forcing gcc-6.4+?

Switching the profile changes the settings for building gcc (it switches a use-
flag from forced-off to forced-on). A gcc-6 built with the 17.0 profiles will 
produce PIE executables by default, a gcc-6 built with the 13.0 profiles will 
not.

I've added this paragraph:
# Switching the profile modifies the settings of GCC 6 to generate
# PIE executables by default; thus, you need to do the rebuilds
# even if you already used GCC 6 beforehand.

> The answer makes a big difference to those already on gcc-6.4+ and who
> presumably already did an empty-tree rebuild of @world when upgrading to
> it, 

That's really not necessary anymore.


-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017, 01:15:42 CEST schrieb Magnus Granberg:

> 
> 3) Hardened profiles will be moved to the 17.0 profile as sub profile.
> 
Are there any special switching instructions for hardened that we need to add?

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfri...@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

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

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-im/pyaim-t, net-im/pork and net-im/reaim

[Jonas Stein]

Here the updated list:

# Jonas Stein  (10 Oct 2017)
# Depends on the AIM service which will be discontinued on 2017-12-15.
# See also bug #633914. Masked for removal on 2017-12-20
net-im/pyaim-t
net-im/pork
net-im/reaim

--
Best regards,
Jonas Stein







signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Kent Fredric]

On Mon, 09 Oct 2017 22:58:22 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel"  wrote:

> Please consider switching from your current 13.0 profile to the
> corresponding 17.0 profile soon after GCC-6.4.0 has been 
> stabilized on your architecture. The 13.0 profiles will be deprecated 
> and removed in the near future.

Just  a question that only became apparent to me as I'm trying to
create a "mostly stable" keyworded chroot, but with this change added
to pick up defects:

Are there any specific versions of toolchain modules that should/must be used
in 17.0 to make it work with GCC-6.4.0?

All I did was:

- Forcibly create the profile symlink myself ( as its not visible to me
  yet with eselect )

- accept-keywords for gcc

- Followed remaining instructions.

And hopefully that should be sufficient.

binutils: 2.28.1
gcc: 6.4.0
glibc: 2.23-r4
libtool: 2.4.6-r3

I know this is typically a "don't mix ~arch and arch" thing, but I
can't actually test things that will break otherwise :p


pgp7koE6etrAO.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-im/pyaim-t

[Jonas Stein]

# Jonas Stein  (10 Oct 2017)
# Depends on the AIM service which will be discontinued on 2017-12-15.
# See also bug #633914. Masked for removal on 2017-12-20
net-im/pyaim-t

--
Best regards,
Jonas Stein





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs net-im/pyaim-t

[Hanno Böck]

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 16:03:35 -0400
Brian Evans  wrote:

> AOL Instant Messenger will be retired on Dec 15, 2017.  Last rite this
> and any other package that is the sole consumer of that service.

Proposal:
Let it in the tree without a maintainer until that date (Dec 15) in case
anyone still wants to use it to say their aim friends goodbye, then
lastrite it.

-- 
Hanno Böck
https://hboeck.de/

mail/jabber: ha...@hboeck.de
GPG: FE73757FA60E4E21B937579FA5880072BBB51E42


pgpehf5s181s7.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: news item for the 17.0 profiles

[Pacho Ramos]

El mar, 10-10-2017 a las 00:23 +0200, Toralf Förster escribió:
> On 10/09/2017 11:40 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Could anyone with enough knowledge finally give a look to the patched vapier
> 
> s/patched/patches/
> 
> or ? :-)
> 

Yes :)