Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] Update of http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org

[Jakub Moc]

25.11.2005, 8:06:51, Flammie Pirinen wrote:

> 2005-11-25, Curtis Napier sanoi, jotta:

>> So on that note, I've gone over the design and gotten it closer to 
>> Aarons's reference. [...] Check out what I did change in the meantime.

> Uh-oh. The usability regression from what the site was yesterday is
> unbelievable. Almost all of the texts are too small to read again, and
> the color combinations are also unreadable again.  I hope that you and
> Aaron are still going to take into account at least all the usability
> related requests from the feedback you asked, because I'd be pretty
> annoyed to see yet another web site redesign that manages to make
> original website even more unusable than it was.

Ouch, what happened again?!... I can't agree more. I object to any redesign if
the whole thing was arranged so badly that all the accessibility flaws are to
be considered an unchangeable part of the "design". Better stick w/ the current
one in that case. :-(


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature ;)

pgpd4hgTLeSpP.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: aging ebuilds with unstable keywords

[Andrej Kacian]

On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 20:39:43 -0600
R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > * if ebuild installs COPYING and/or INSTALL into doc.
> 
> Is this actually important?  There are a hell of a lot of ebuilds that fail
> under this rule.  I'd like to start filing patches for some of the packages
> in this list so I'm interested in knowing what's worth fixing and what's
> being pedantic.

Note that some of the packages caught by this test also install non-generic
(thus actually useful) INSTALL document.

-- 
Andrej "Ticho" Kacian 
Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, sound, x86


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] manpages that requires dependencies

[Jakub Moc]

25.11.2005, 0:58:28, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:49:23 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Petteno"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that
> | we can make it a sort of rule).
> | How should manpages that are generated be managed?
> | 
> | The common sense and looking to other ebuilds would say to always
> | build man pages, but when it asks me to install something like
> | docbook-sgml-utils, I'm tempted not to do that ;)

> man pages can't be considered optional (despite what RMS says). They're
> not fancy extra HTML API documentation, they're core, so they don't get
> a USE flag.

> Of course, if FEATURES were in the USE expand list, you could use
> ! features_noman ? ( ) ...

That is all fine and dandy, but if you search bugzilla for USE=doc related
bugs, you might think twice before adding yet another inevitably broken thing
to portage. docbook-sgml-utils & co. is extremely fragile and buggy thing.


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature ;)

pgpZ9CTbskDFd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Update of http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org

[Flammie Pirinen]

2005-11-25, Curtis Napier sanoi, jotta:

> I honestly thought that the changes I made were better from an 
> accessibility standpoint. I guess I was wrong. 

Not really.

> So on that note, I've gone over the design and gotten it closer to 
> Aarons's reference. [...] Check out what I did change in the meantime.

Uh-oh. The usability regression from what the site was yesterday is
unbelievable. Almost all of the texts are too small to read again, and
the color combinations are also unreadable again.  I hope that you and
Aaron are still going to take into account at least all the usability
related requests from the feedback you asked, because I'd be pretty
annoyed to see yet another web site redesign that manages to make
original website even more unusable than it was.

-- 
Flammie, Gentoo Linux Documentation's Finnish head translator.



pgpezKzV4Bo8M.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Update of http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org

[Curtis Napier]

I honestly thought that the changes I made were better from an 
accessibility standpoint. I guess I was wrong. Aaron was gone for months 
and months and months so I was listening to the feedback from others and 
trying to please everyone. I think I forgot that I took on this project 
to implement Aaron's winning design and not to *redesign* it to make 
other people happy. Aaron is the designer, I am simply the schmuck who 
is putting it into the XSL.


I took on this project thinking that Aaron and I would work together as 
a team but when Real Life called Aaron away for all that time I did the 
best I could. Now that his real life obligations are giving him more 
time, Aaron is back. He and I will work together to implement this as 
closely as possible to his reference desogn.


So on that note, I've gone over the design and gotten it closer to 
Aarons's reference. It's a Holiday in my country and I'm going out of 
town so what you see on the test site won't be updated anymore until I 
get back. Check out what I did change in the meantime.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] manpages that requires dependencies

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Friday 25 November 2005 00:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> man pages can't be considered optional (despite what RMS says). They're
> not fancy extra HTML API documentation, they're core, so they don't get
> a USE flag.
I know (and I *really* don't like info for one) but I think I'd rather disable 
it and ship pre-built manpages, instead of adding docbook-sgml-utils to the 
deps.

> Of course, if FEATURES were in the USE expand list, you could use
> ! features_noman ? ( ) ...
Right... that *would* be useful...

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgpwOZwdfx9rI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] manpages that requires dependencies

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:49:23 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that
| we can make it a sort of rule).
| How should manpages that are generated be managed?
| 
| The common sense and looking to other ebuilds would say to always
| build man pages, but when it asks me to install something like
| docbook-sgml-utils, I'm tempted not to do that ;)

man pages can't be considered optional (despite what RMS says). They're
not fancy extra HTML API documentation, they're core, so they don't get
a USE flag.

Of course, if FEATURES were in the USE expand list, you could use
! features_noman ? ( ) ...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Supreme Lord Gerbil Wrangler)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] manpages that requires dependencies

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

Hi everybody, a little question that I'd like to be answered (so that we can 
make it a sort of rule).
How should manpages that are generated be managed?

The common sense and looking to other ebuilds would say to always build man 
pages, but when it asks me to install something like docbook-sgml-utils, I'm 
tempted not to do that ;)

The 'doc' useflag, as I see it, is not a good way to achieve that, as it's 
already used for API documentation (unless we start create a "apidoc" useflag 
instead, that would help, too). A 'man' useflag?

So people, flame on! [let's use the mailing list for some constructive 
development things ;)]

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgpc9sJx3GYHL.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Friday 25 November 2005 00:13, Francesco R. wrote:
> did'nt know that, I will try in the ebuild too
Pretty please *don't* use ldconfig in ebuilds.

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgp3ONHJ6JHnV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16

[Francesco R.]

Alle 23:37, giovedì 24 novembre 2005, Robin H. Johnson el ga butta:
> |On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:51:42PM +0100, Francesco R. wrote:
> |> # for i in libmysqlclient.so libmysqlclient_r.so ; do \
> |>  for j in "" .15 .15.0 .15.0.0 ; do \
> |>   echo ln -s /usr/lib/${i}.15.0.0 ${i}${j} \
> |>  ; done \
> |> ; done
> |
> |ldconfig should have created these symlinks, unless something was
> | wrong with the .so.15.0.0.

did'nt know that, I will try in the ebuild too

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo

[George Prowse]

On 24/11/05, lnxg33k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:49:18 +0100 Filip Bartmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > | I want have Gentoo in e-shop with Linux distributions. I find, that
> > | Gentoo is under GNU/GPL. Must I distribute in e-shop sources of
> > | Gentoo too? Where I can found them(sources)? Where I can found
> > | graphics, which I can use on CD with Gentoo?
> >
> > Consult your lawyer. Any legal advice you get on this list will be
> > bogus.
> >
>
> Any legal advice given by those not in a position to give said advice (a
> licensed attornery) is actually illegal -- just some general info.
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
Being consulted on legal matters under the pretense that you are
qualified to do so is fraud but any one can advise on legal matters.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16

[Robin H. Johnson]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:51:42PM +0100, Francesco R. wrote:
> # for i in libmysqlclient.so libmysqlclient_r.so ; do \
>  for j in "" .15 .15.0 .15.0.0 ; do \
>   echo ln -s /usr/lib/${i}.15.0.0 ${i}${j} \
>  ; done \
> ; done
ldconfig should have created these symlinks, unless something was wrong
with the .so.15.0.0.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85


pgpCmQbTB0Ccn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-dev] my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16

[Francesco R.]

my apologies for the mess with this release of MySQL 5.0.16 and for the 
one will come with the dev-db/mysql-4.1.15-r1 ebuild

Here is the relevant list of bugs opened (and closed) as a consequence 
of the new ebuild.

[Bug 113451] mysql-4.1.15 re-keyworded as -* with no note in changelog 
as to why
[Bug 113440] typo in mysql-5.0.16-r2 init script
[Bug 113356] /etc/init.d/mysql script fails to start server in 
mysql-5.0.16
[Bug 113352] mysql-5.0.16-r1 does not 
create /usr/lib{64}/libmysqlclient.so.15 symlink
[Bug 113334] mysql MD5 mysql-extras-20050920.tar.bz2 VERIFY FAILED! (old 
ebuild has correct value)

If you installed 5.0.16, the 1st and don't want to re-emerge it, follow 
these steps:
(may need to adjust the path accordingly with ARCH and personal 
settings)

# emerge --sync
# cp /usr/portage/dev-db/mysql/files/mysql-slot.rc6 /etc/init.d/mysql
# chmod +x /etc/init.d/mysql
# cd /usr/lib{64}
# for i in libmysqlclient.so libmysqlclient_r.so ; do \
 for j in "" .15 .15.0 .15.0.0 ; do \
  echo ln -s /usr/lib/${i}.15.0.0 ${i}${j} \
 ; done \
; done
# chown -R mysql:mysql /var/run/mysqld/


Regards,
Francesco R.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo

[lnxg33k]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:49:18 +0100 Filip Bartmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | I want have Gentoo in e-shop with Linux distributions. I find, that
> | Gentoo is under GNU/GPL. Must I distribute in e-shop sources of
> | Gentoo too? Where I can found them(sources)? Where I can found
> | graphics, which I can use on CD with Gentoo?
> 
> Consult your lawyer. Any legal advice you get on this list will be
> bogus.
> 

Any legal advice given by those not in a position to give said advice (a
licensed attornery) is actually illegal -- just some general info.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation

[lnxg33k]

A few posts here have mentioned Catalyst and its respective documentation. I
remember tossing out some bugs about the docs and was told they were old and
being redone. A quick google seems to bring up some dated stuff. Anyway, are
those docs up yet (I'd even be interested in working copies) and, if so, where
at? Thanks.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Grobian]

Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:

On Thursday 24 November 2005 21:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

*shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of
handling developer documentation.
If it's just matter of fixing the English in it, I don't think there's much 
technical matter they would be required to think about.
I'm not saying they should write *more* of it, it's just a way to clean up the 
form of something written by the techies.


Beware that this can get tricky; sometimes it's very easy to change the 
meaning of a sentence by 'correcting' it.  Hence a feedback loop sounds 
like a necessity.



| Not everybody is a native English speaker, and it's stupid blaming
| people for that.
There doesn't seem to be any strong correlation between being a native
English speaker and being able to write correct English...
You might not be able to see it because you're one, so don't even try to find 
lame reasons. It's not _easy_ at all.


If you look at the quote below, I think that it is not easy for anyone. 
 Hence, you need designated people for such job as corrector and get a 
certain style for your text.



| On Thursday 24 November 2005 20:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Of course, the problem
| > with that is that some our package maintainers couldn't stick
| > together a coherent English sentence even if they were paid to do
| > so...


--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project -- Interim Lead
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Thursday 24 November 2005 21:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> *shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of
> handling developer documentation.
If it's just matter of fixing the English in it, I don't think there's much 
technical matter they would be required to think about.
I'm not saying they should write *more* of it, it's just a way to clean up the 
form of something written by the techies.

> | Not everybody is a native English speaker, and it's stupid blaming
> | people for that.
> There doesn't seem to be any strong correlation between being a native
> English speaker and being able to write correct English...
You might not be able to see it because you're one, so don't even try to find 
lame reasons. It's not _easy_ at all.

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgplP3JJ0cdrz.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:58:46 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Thursday 24 November 2005 20:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Of course, the problem
| > with that is that some our package maintainers couldn't stick
| > together a coherent English sentence even if they were paid to do
| > so...
|
| That's why I was thinking of a complete project with some doc guys
| assigned to grammar revision.

*shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of
handling developer documentation. It's probably better off with a
separate team, with some people belonging to both as necessary.
 
| Not everybody is a native English speaker, and it's stupid blaming
| people for that.

There doesn't seem to be any strong correlation between being a native
English speaker and being able to write correct English...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Supreme Lord Gerbil Wrangler)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] New Dev: Marien Zwart (marienz)

[Sven Vermeulen]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 09:51:25AM -0600, Brian Harring wrote:
> Please welcome Marien Zwart, aka marienz to the crew.  He's joining up 
> as a python monkey, working on twisted (2.x stable ebuilds anyone? 
> ^.^), portage 3 hacking, and pretty much anything python wise.
> Finally, he's been helping out in #gentoo for quite some time.
[...]

Hey I know that lurker from #gentoo...

Welcome aboard!

-- 
  Gentoo Foundation Trustee  |  http://foundation.gentoo.org
  Gentoo Documentation Project Lead  |  http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gdp
  Gentoo Council Member  

  The Gentoo Project   <<< http://www.gentoo.org >>>


pgpYhfsy1lxIh.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Thursday 24 November 2005 20:50, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Of course, the problem
> with that is that some our package maintainers couldn't stick together
> a coherent English sentence even if they were paid to do so...
That's why I was thinking of a complete project with some doc guys assigned to 
grammar revision.

Not everybody is a native English speaker, and it's stupid blaming people for 
that.

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgpcalDDlCFKk.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 15:08:19 +0100 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Thursday 24 November 2005 14:51, Grant Goodyear wrote:
| > Assuming that they're reasonably well written, why not add them to
| > The Doc?
|
| For the same reason the doc born outside GDP: quick changes, for
| once.

If I ever get around to regaining enough faith in humanity to do the
"Gentoo Developer Documentation" proposal, quick changes for package
specific sections will be one of the features. Of course, the problem
with that is that some our package maintainers couldn't stick together
a coherent English sentence even if they were paid to do so...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Supreme Lord Gerbil Wrangler)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] enewuser/enewgroup getting their own eclass

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 08:54:41AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 03:44 +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 01:15:52PM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > > OK.  I've been looking at some of these issues we've been having, and
> > > I've been thinking of moving enewuser, egetent, and enewgroup to their
> > > own eclass.  This will resolve some issues with things in system, or
> > > otherwise early on, requiring shadow on Linux to get useradd.  Two
> > > examples of this are bug #113298 and bug #94745.  By putting them in
> > > their own eclass, we can keep from adding shadow to DEPEND in eutils,
> > > while still putting the dependency in the eclass that uses it.
> > 
> > i think i suggested this somewhere before, but why dont we just add
> > shadow to packages.build ... then it'll be in stage[123] and the DEPEND
> > will be a moot point
> 
> That doesn't solve the issue.

of course it does ... putting a package in packages.build means it will
be in all stages which means no package (like cronbase) will ever fail
again because the useradd binaries will always exist
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] R/O CVS access and its purpose for ATs (was Email subdomain)

[Lance Albertson]

George Prowse wrote:

> What about finding out how many ATs are going to be using it at the
> start and limiting the amount of ATs with access to <40-50 until
> either a new way for access has been decided on or new equipment has
> been brought it. Currently I wouldn't need it because I am without
> amd64 equipment until after equipment.

I would rather resolve the issue now rather than integrate 50 or more
people into our cvs system and 'fix' it later. Lets just be patient and
we'll sort out the technical details soon enough.

Cheers-

-- 
Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
GPG Public Key:  
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net


signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] R/O CVS access and its purpose for ATs (was Email subdomain)

[George Prowse]

On 23/11/05, Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Daniel Ostrow wrote:
>
> > Lance:
> >
> > I know this is a far cry from what you are proposing, and I understand
> > that the present CVS server cannot handle this sort of load but I
> > believe that this was the original intention at least...someone correct
> > me if I am wrong.
>
> One of the issues we had with direct cvs access is managing all of the
> AT accounts. If we're talking 50-100 ATs, that increases our user
> account management load by a lot considering we only have 300 developers
> right now. The other reason is of course with load on lark itself. We
> can only do so many concurrent cvs up's of the full tree and adding this
> many users concerns me alot with that aspect.
>
> As what kurt said in a followup to this email, If we can nail down that
> the primary need of the GLEP is quick access to changes, that will help
> us a lot in figuring out the logistics of the issue.
>
> I know pylon had talked about the newer cvs allowing for a virtually
> 'live' update to another cvs box via a commit hook, but he's been rather
> busy lately and hasn't had a chance to work on that. I think that has
> the best hope down the road of resolving this GLEP. I would just like to
> keep the management of lark to the minimum if at all possible, so for
> now I would prefer a restricted rsync module or cvs box that gets
> updated every X minutes.
>
> Cheers-
>
> --
> Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager
>
> ---
> GPG Public Key:  
> Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742
>
> ramereth/irc.freenode.net
>
>
What about finding out how many ATs are going to be using it at the
start and limiting the amount of ATs with access to <40-50 until
either a new way for access has been decided on or new equipment has
been brought it. Currently I wouldn't need it because I am without
amd64 equipment until after equipment.

George

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] apache2 default for 2006.0

[Chris Gianelloni]

I'd like to add the apache2 USE flag to 2006.0's profile.  This would
not resolve bug #95140, but would keep users from hitting it by default.
With apache being such a popular package, having it fail from a default
stage3 installation reflects poorly on us all.  If I haven't heard any
good objections by November 30th, I'll make the change.  This will *not*
be retroactive to any previous release profiles.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Thursday 24 November 2005 14:51, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Assuming that they're reasonably well written, why not add them to The
> Doc?
For the same reason the doc born outside GDP: quick changes, for once. for 
example the xine mantainer's guide yesterday was changed "on the spot" when 
the TEXTRELs problem was found, both its and vlc's guides were changed as 
soon as I moved the patchsets in gentoo CVS.
The point is to have maintainers update their notes as they do them. If a new 
release come up, I can quickly update the notes about it.

> Alternatively (and perhaps more usefully), what about permitting a 
> MaintainerNotes file in any cat/pkg directory where it would be useful?
That would be quite every package, because there's no package "without notes". 
Also the simplest packages might have something that needs to be checked.
And adding one more file to the tree, of considerable size for some cases 
(look at xine's guide, it's quite long) would be really bad.
And I still think that something more elaborated than txt can help in writing 
notes about that.. I know that many people does not like GuideXML, but it's 
flexible enough for most of the needs of a packager's notes.
Referring again to the xine's guide, you can find that all the useflags stated 
are in bold.. if someone wants to find out why a given useflag is threated in 
certain way, it's simple to spot it, it's not so simple when you have to do 
it with a plain text file.

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgpKOVnNJcie4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Multi hash support in portage - status

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 20:57 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > Nope, not missing anything. Thought I said it, compability isn't a
> > reason to hold this up anymore, only asking if people want multi-hashes
> > now at the expense of a bigger tree when Manifest2 comes along.
> 
> I'm referring to portage-2.0.50 and below. What exactly needs to be done by 
> those few that are still using it to upgrade to a better portage after it 
> dies on finding SHA1 sums in portage's digest?

They would need to redigest portage/sandbox with their version of
portage, as you said.  They would need to create a symlink
from /etc/make.profile to /usr/portage/profiles/obsolete/$arch, then
they would need to emerge --oneshot sandbox portage.  After that, they
can upgrade to a supported profile.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Multi hash support in portage - status

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 11:38 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > I'd rather wait for Manifest2 support.
> > What is the ETA for the GLEP and the implementation after i?
> 
> GLEP I still have to start writing (mostly a reformatting of a mail I
> sent a long time ago), there is already a prototype implementation
> (doesn't cover everything yet but works generally), target is
> for when current trunk will be released (still have to settle on a
> version for it), which should hopefully be after 2.0.54 gets out
> (which should be in the next few weeks). At a guess I'd say 4 months
> till stable (but really, that's just a guess, see the 2.1 fiasko).

I think I would rather see the multi-hash support now, rather than
later, as it seems to be something our users are asking about and it
seems like all the work is really there for an implementation sooner
rather than later.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Multi hash support in portage - status

[Grant Goodyear]

Marius Mauch wrote: [Thu Nov 24 2005, 04:38:44AM CST]
> GLEP I still have to start writing (mostly a reformatting of a mail I
> sent a long time ago), there is already a prototype implementation
> (doesn't cover everything yet but works generally), target is
> for when current trunk will be released (still have to settle on a
> version for it), which should hopefully be after 2.0.54 gets out
> (which should be in the next few weeks). At a guess I'd say 4 months
> till stable (but really, that's just a guess, see the 2.1 fiasko).

Personally, I'd much rather see the nascent support go in, even at the
cost of expanding the tree a tad, rather than push it off into the
fairly distant future.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear  
Gentoo Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76


pgpveWlvEIX9O.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] enewuser/enewgroup getting their own eclass

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 03:44 +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 01:15:52PM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > OK.  I've been looking at some of these issues we've been having, and
> > I've been thinking of moving enewuser, egetent, and enewgroup to their
> > own eclass.  This will resolve some issues with things in system, or
> > otherwise early on, requiring shadow on Linux to get useradd.  Two
> > examples of this are bug #113298 and bug #94745.  By putting them in
> > their own eclass, we can keep from adding shadow to DEPEND in eutils,
> > while still putting the dependency in the eclass that uses it.
> 
> i think i suggested this somewhere before, but why dont we just add
> shadow to packages.build ... then it'll be in stage[123] and the DEPEND
> will be a moot point

That doesn't solve the issue.  The issue is that cronbase *needs* shadow
in its dependency tree to force portage to install shadow before
cronbase when doing an emerge -e system.  It has nothing to do with the
stages.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Grant Goodyear]

Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: [Thu Nov 24 2005, 05:31:32AM CST]
> What I'm waiting for now are comments if someone has ideas where to
> put guides that does not belong directly to an existant project. And
> if someone wants to join the effort of documenting maintenance process
> for his packages, it would be helpful, too.

Assuming that they're reasonably well written, why not add them to The
Doc?  Alternatively (and perhaps more usefully), what about permitting a
MaintainerNotes file in any cat/pkg directory where it would be useful?
A plain text file would be easier for people to create and maintain, and
its presence would quickly alert devs to potential quirks with a
possibly unfamiliar package.  Of course, the drawback would be the
additional tree bloat.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear  
Gentoo Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76


pgpdPwMPOn195.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Multi hash support in portage - status

[Jason Stubbs]

On Thursday 24 November 2005 10:07, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 09:49:20 +0900
>
> Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 24 November 2005 09:32, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > > On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:04:32 +0100
> > >
> > > Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Ok I have three modifications that are pending to go into portage:
> > > > - The first simply enables creation of SHA1 checksums (and others
> > > > if implemented like with the second mod), if you want to try it
> > > > yourself see the attached patch.
> >
> > Looking through CVS, this was supported in at least
> > portage-2.0.51_rc10 right? This implies that the only versions that
> > will have problems are 2.0.50-r11 and under? If so, they've already
> > got the cascaded profile problem so breaking things a little more
> > won't hurt much. ;)
> >
> > Seriously though, those that can't handle the new format would have
> > to do what? Regenerate digests for sandbox and portage and then
> > emerge each of them with --oneshot? Am I missing anything else there?
>
> Nope, not missing anything. Thought I said it, compability isn't a
> reason to hold this up anymore, only asking if people want multi-hashes
> now at the expense of a bigger tree when Manifest2 comes along.

I'm referring to portage-2.0.50 and below. What exactly needs to be done by 
those few that are still using it to upgrade to a better portage after it 
dies on finding SHA1 sums in portage's digest?

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Thursday 24 November 2005 01:01, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> I'm going in the next days to add more and more documentation about this as
> I want to leave enough notes for someone else to step over if I have to go
> away for a medium/long period.
Okay, brix suggested me to explain better what I meant as the phrasing sucked 
(as often from me).

What I'm waiting for now are comments if someone has ideas where to put guides 
that does not belong directly to an existant project. And if someone wants to 
join the effort of documenting maintenance process for his packages, it would 
be helpful, too.

If there's enough volunteers to document the packages, it might be worth 
having a "maintainers' guides" project to save all the guides to..

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE


pgpVy1xnrDFC5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Multi hash support in portage - status

[Marius Mauch]

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:33:34 +0100
Marc Hildebrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Marius Mauch wrote:
> [..]
> > So much for background information, now to the actual question:
> > Would you rather have now the ability to create multi-hash digests
> > and Manifests with the result of a short and mid-term larger
> > portage tree (in the long term the format will be phased out
> > hopefully) or rather wait for Manifest2 support (which will
> > definitely include multi hash support)?
> 
> I'd rather wait for Manifest2 support.
> What is the ETA for the GLEP and the implementation after i?

GLEP I still have to start writing (mostly a reformatting of a mail I
sent a long time ago), there is already a prototype implementation
(doesn't cover everything yet but works generally), target is
for when current trunk will be released (still have to settle on a
version for it), which should hopefully be after 2.0.54 gets out
(which should be in the next few weeks). At a guess I'd say 4 months
till stable (but really, that's just a guess, see the 2.1 fiasko).

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Update of http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:23:37AM +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> Like I said before, I rather like the infinity sign. The trustees have had a
> discussion on this part too. Their decision was that we need a "strong,
> compelling case for not using it since it is something the community has
> voted on".

I'd say the fact that the Fedora Project plans to have it as part of
their official logo (as mentioned in this thread) is enough for us not
have it on our web page.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd


pgpSdvDC8UMD5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Update of http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org

[Paul de Vrieze]

On Thursday 24 November 2005 06:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 06:23:37AM +0100, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 06:05:53PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > Afaicr, the infinity sign will be kept, but I know a huge
> > > > discussion will be held on this. It's not important in this stage
> > > > of the development though...
> > >
> > > And now we're told that it *was* important at that stage and it's
> > > too late to change things? Riiight.
> >
> > Like I said before, I rather like the infinity sign. The trustees
> > have had a discussion on this part too. Their decision was that we
> > need a "strong, compelling case for not using it since it is
> > something the community has voted on".
>
> by 'voted on' you mean the vote that happened on the forums ?  i
> thought that vote was for the different website designs, they didnt
> really cover aspects of different designs

That's true. What I remember from the trustee decision making process was 
that indeed the winning design was a guideline for what should be 
implemented, not an absolute. That's why (at least) I wanted Aaron to 
participate in the implementation.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net


pgpk3SlyCqYbm.pgp
Description: PGP signature