On 07/10/18 16:35, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 10/07/18 21:09, William Hubbs wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:54:35PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> On 07/09/2018 03:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
On 09/07/18 23:12, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 07/09/2018 02:34 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
As long as an announcement is made in advance (perhaps as a NEWS item)
and portage itself is prepared to do an in-place migration if
necessary, I think things will be fine.
I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout
for awhile.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:24 AM Gordon
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 2:29 AM, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
> This is a mess, many systems are setup with portage already on a
> seperate partition for reasons. What advantage does it provide to move
> the tree now after all these years? I have seen nothing more then lets
> do this cause I like the
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:36 AM Raymond Jennings wrote:
>
> I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout
> for awhile.
>
I don't see why we would ever stop supporting it, at least in general.
Maybe if some day somebody had a solution for a read-only /usr with
signature
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:56 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:36 AM Raymond Jennings
> wrote:
> >
> > I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout
> > for awhile.
> >
>
> I don't see why we would ever stop supporting it, at least in general.
>
On 07/11/2018 03:29 AM, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
> On 07/10/18 16:35, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> On 10/07/18 21:09, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:54:35PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
On 07/09/2018 03:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 09/07/18 23:12, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On
On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:38:27 -0400
kuzetsa wrote:
> Authorship was never shown in dev-timeline for addresses
> which aren't @gentoo.org anyway. That's a separate issue,
> so this policy change shouldn't affect proxy-maint?
Then why does the dev timeline show me starting at Oct 2015, but git
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 06:24:20PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:11 PM Richard Yao wrote:
> >
> > Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage
> > tree is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true of
> > everything else
On Mon, 09 Jul 2018 10:40:22 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We currently don't enforce any particular standard for e-mail addresses
> for developers committing to gentoo.git. FWICS, the majority of
> developers is using their @gentoo.org e-mail addresses. However, a few
> developers are
[Please fix your mailer. Your message has a broken "References" header.]
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018, Richard Yao wrote:
> This does not answer my question. Is it really a FHS violation? The
> contents of /usr changes when doing updates using the system package
> manager. When not doing updates,
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
> napisał:
On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao wrote:
On my system, /usr/portage
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:52 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jul 2018 10:40:22 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We currently don't enforce any particular standard for e-mail addresses
>> for developers committing to gentoo.git. FWICS, the majority of
>> developers is using their
On July 11, 2018 8:52:56 PM PDT, Kent Fredric wrote:
>Standard git tools will not attempt to even *change* these commits even
>with an explicit rebase, because Git will detect that nothing needs to
>change, and will no-op the rebase, leaving Committer and Signatures
>intact, degrading to a
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:11 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>
> Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage tree
> is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true of
> everything else in /usr.
>
It is application metadata. It belongs in /var. No other
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 04:25:20PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2018 03:29 AM, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
On 07/10/18 16:35, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 10/07/18 21:09, William Hubbs wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to
>> have on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints.
>
> It makes sense to follow FHS. Sure, I
W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶26 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
napisał:
> > On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
> > napisał:
> > > > > On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > > >
>
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>
> On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to have
> on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints.
It makes sense to follow FHS. Sure, I can work around poor designs by
sticking mount points all over the
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 04:25:20PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 07/11/2018 03:29 AM, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
> > On 07/10/18 16:35, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> >> On 10/07/18 21:09, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:54:35PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 07/09/2018 03:27 PM, M.
W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
napisał:
> > On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao wrote:
> > >
> > > On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to
> > > have on,h
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 11:56 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:36 AM Raymond Jennings wrote:
>>
>> I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout
>> for awhile.
>>
>
> I don't see why we would ever stop supporting it, at least in general.
>
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:24 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:11 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage tree
>> is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true of
>> everything else in
22 matches
Mail list logo
