[gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Carsten Lohrke wrote: we're understaffed, partly - and this is my very personal opinion - the problem is that releasing with GCC 4.x has been rushed I'd have to agree with you on that. I understand the appeal of exciting press releases but there were over 75 GCC 4.1 bugs still open for problems in *~arch* when the decision was made to go stable. Even now there's more than 50 left, with an equal and growing number of stable bugs. On the other hand, the (misinformed?) perception that Gentoo was trailing further and further behind the other distros in terms of version numbers had been raised more than a couple times in the last six months, so i can see the reasoning behind wanting to make a statement. --de. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Paid support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 08:55:33AM -0500, Mike Doty wrote: >>> If that's not good enough for you, please find a distribution that you >>> have to pay for like RHEL. Their testing is no better than ours, but >>> at least paying something entitles you to bitch at them. >> Or consider paying a Gentoo developer [*] as your first level support >> person, and liaison with Gentoo. Thus they consult for you, and tell you >> if your specific combinations are going to work, and do their hardest to >> keep them working. > > It might be worth putting together a list of folks interested in doing > this on the Gentoo website, under a Third-party Paid Support section. We > already have a Support link on the top of www.g.o, it could be on that page. > > Thanks, > Donnie > I like it. probably should have it's own thread though... - -- === Mike Doty kingtaco -at- gentoo.org Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead Gentoo Developer Relations Gentoo Recruitment Lead Gentoo Infrastructure GPG: E1A5 1C9C 93FE F430 C1D6 F2AF 806B A2E4 19F4 AE05 === -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBRPnl4oBrouQZ9K4FAQIodQQA8fQLHp3Gk4LTAxF1bACBWCYgvd37Y0QV rqJIKtqPJr90X9/KUBRxsWh2fxw0/iBEVNU9QptqIRmBUjX3dMzD4oDBagRlemSQ BKdOkMI/H1T3YX8NSLOWyey9RBP2sIhdoPvNzIZYLbHOhv9gaKfoWZZPxqveh2T1 FuA0sUj/v3U= =fXMu -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Democracy: No silver bullet
On 9/2/06, Wiktor Wandachowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I suppose that there is a way that Gentoo can follow, only that its leaders, developers and users need to see it clearly. Is there a publicly visible page that contains current goals for new releases? Where all sub-project leaders could add their own goals, coherent with the general vision? I couldn't find it, but maybe I haven't looked in the right places? The problem I see is that for Gentoo the releases are not really useful milestones for most projects. A release is really significant for a few core packages, but what is the real downside for users if Xorg 7.2 is stabilized one week after a release? Outside of the fact that they have to compile it themselves instead of using the GRP package...not much that I see. For a distro like Ubuntu, a release is very significant, as it is the platform that users will be running for the next 6-18 months. Do you think Ubuntu roadmaps would be useful without being tied to a release? Or could project status reports (as discussed here recently) fit the same bill? Maybe I should raise such concerns to the User Representatives first No, definitely not. The point of user reps (of which I am one) is not to filter communications between devs and users, but to improve the communications between the two camps, among other things. If you want to bring an idea up here directly, nobody should respond with "talk to your userrep". -Richard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] treecleaner removals
5 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/x11-plugins/gkrellm-alltraxclock/ (5 files in 2 dirs): removing x11-plugins/gkrellm-alltraxclock for bug # 62373 This package hadn't been touched since 2002 and didn't compile # 6 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/net-misc/bk2site/ (9 files in 2 dirs): Removing bk2site for bug # 67352 Needed porting to webapp.eclass, merges to /home/bk2site/ :P # 9 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/net-libs/libical-moz/ (3 files in 2 dirs): Removing net-libs/libical-moz for bug # 123016 dead upstream, broken tarball. # 12 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/app-admin/runset/ (6 files in 2 dirs): Removing app-admin/runset for bug # 142454 Compilation failure. # 13 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/www-client/skipstone/ (5 files in 2 dirs): Removing skipstone for bug # 138287 Requested by Maintainer # 24 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/media-libs/openvrml/ (6 files in 2 dirs): removing media-libs/openvrml for bug # 137775 Multiple compilation failure and gcc issues. # 24 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/net-news/rol/ (8 files in 2 dirs): Removing net-news/rol for bug # 120920 Dead upstream, broken 0.3 versions # 25 min ago gentoo Commit by antarus :: gentoo-x86/media-video/mvideo/ (5 files in 2 dirs): Removing mvideo for bug # 85763 Broken C# code, no one bothered to fix it. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] prozilla
Was removed due to repeated security issues, see bug 70090. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for September
Daniel Ostrow wrote: > On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:08 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 05:51:07AM +, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the >>> 2nd Thursday once a month), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ >>> irc.freenode.net) ! >> Is this the new council for which the voting should have just ended, or >> the old council? > > Polls for the council close at 00:00 UTC September 11th, they didn't > open on Aug 1st. As such it will be three days after the polls close so > it should be the inaugural meeting of the new council. > > --Dan I wish to add the agenda item, "what kind of QA does gentoo need, and what kind of QA will gentoo support." Our current QA team doesn't do much; the tools are lacking in many areas. Does the community as a whole really care about all these (minor) violations? Can I as a member of QA just go through and fix them? Along with this somewhat is package "ownership." I agree that the maintainer has final say in many areas related to their package (or set of packages) but breaking QA perhaps shouldn't be one of them; or should it? Does our current QA policy fail in light of portage's failings (see glep 42, requests for post_src_depend() action where we detect problems in use flags prior to merging, USE/SLOT deps ). Should our QA policy evolve? I also wish to bring up the games team in this regard as generally the QA team ignores anything games-*. This comment is not meant to bash the games team (imho they do an utterly awesome job on almost all of their stuff); they just happen to violate qa rules doing so ;P This agenda point is not a "hard point" more-so I seek the council's recommendation on what you (being the elected council) think Gentoo needs as far as QA. Last year Halcy0n petitioned for power for the QA team; it was quite like a ball crushing power (fix it or we will) and it seemed to have all kinds of frictional issues. This being a global issue I would like to hear thoughts on how this could be done better; or we can abandon the idea of a QA team. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/2/06, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/2/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Give us about 3000 more developers, and sure* ;) > > > > I don't think that that's good thing to be saying to our users. > > Is it a bad thing to be saying to your developers? It wasn't said to developers, it was said to a user. It was in response to gimli, who unless he stole his @g.o address is a developer. > The gcc-4.1 stabilization bug has been open for a month and a half. That's great, but that's not an announcement. Folks aren't going to go digging through bugs to find stuff like this. > Thats fairly good notice... Only to the folks who knew about that bug. For the wider community ... it's not notice. The wider community will not be effected until they manually make the switch to 4.1, just like any other gcc upgrade. Before doing this one would assume they would do a little research. > Warnings have also appeared on > planet.gentoo.org, and in the GWN. Tsunam posted that there was a push on to get gcc-4.1 stable, but there was no target date, and no firm statement that said it would definitely be happening. He posted this on July 19th. Was there another warning, with dates and stuff? The GWN warning was last week. My apologies if there was an earlier one that I missed. My apologies, but I've been unable to find an announcement on -dev. I do not know if there was on on -dev, I remember hearing for a little while now that 2006.1 was going to be gcc-4.1.1, but I don't remember if I read that or heard it in the -x86 irc channel, it may have been there which doesn't really count :) Beyond the stabilization warnings however, I would think that gcc-4.1.1 entering unstable (which had a number of announcements IIRC) should be warning to all users that it was now on track to be stable, and to be prepared. I really do not see what kind of further warning was necessary or even possible... maybe I'm missing something. (Other than the yet-to-be-implemented GLEP42 of course) Dan, Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
On 9/2/06, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/2/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Give us about 3000 more developers, and sure* ;) > > I don't think that that's good thing to be saying to our users. Is it a bad thing to be saying to your developers? It wasn't said to developers, it was said to a user. The gcc-4.1 stabilization bug has been open for a month and a half. That's great, but that's not an announcement. Folks aren't going to go digging through bugs to find stuff like this. Thats fairly good notice... Only to the folks who knew about that bug. For the wider community ... it's not notice. Warnings have also appeared on planet.gentoo.org, and in the GWN. Tsunam posted that there was a push on to get gcc-4.1 stable, but there was no target date, and no firm statement that said it would definitely be happening. He posted this on July 19th. Was there another warning, with dates and stuff? The GWN warning was last week. My apologies if there was an earlier one that I missed. My apologies, but I've been unable to find an announcement on -dev. Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
On Sunday 03 September 2006 00:16, Carsten Lohrke wrote: > Neither Gnome nor KDE (no use flag in this case) accessibiliy stuff builds > now - and bug 116030 is open since nine months. And waiting other 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 months won't change the thing. Why? Because we have _no_ accessibility team right now. If we had one, the problem would have been solved. Unfortunately that software is doomed to lag behind the rest of Gentoo unless someone maintain it. If it wasn't for the need of that software by some users, probably treecleaners would have removed that already. In _this_ particular case, the notice interval is not important. -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE pgp5nlXyUJjEz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Paid support
Stuart Herbert wrote: Hi, We'll also need to sort out a process for handling complaints against developers from the folks they help. Doesn't matter how well we make it clear that these folks are "independent"; their actions will reflect on Gentoo as a whole, and unhappy customers _will_ complain to us sooner or later. Rather than pretent it won't happen, better we're pro-active and have something prepared. That's a very smart thought. Let's do it. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
On 9/2/06, Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 9/2/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Give us about 3000 more developers, and sure* ;) I don't think that that's good thing to be saying to our users. Is it a bad thing to be saying to your developers? We didn't need 3000 more developers ... we just needed to give the developers we have more reasonable notice. This is the second time in recent weeks that we've acted like this, by stabilising a major package with little or no notice. It's the same group of folks involved both times. The gcc-4.1 stabilization bug has been open for a month and a half. Thats fairly good notice... Warnings have also appeared on planet.gentoo.org, and in the GWN. Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Seems my message got swallowed... On Saturday 02 September 2006 15:36, Edgar Hucek wrote: > Just a side hint. Try to enable all flags at the first cimpile time would > reduce trys drasticaly ;) There are lots of use flag combinations incompatible with each other within a package as well as packages relying on other ones to be build with or without use flags of other packages. The number of pssoble combinations would is too high, even if we had build servers running around the clock. In case of point two, you're right, that it doesn't let Gentoo look good. Neither Gnome nor KDE (no use flag in this case) accessibiliy stuff builds now - and bug 116030 is open since nine months. Partly the problem is that we're understaffed, partly - and this is my very personal opinion - the problem is that releasing with GCC 4.x has been rushed - speak the notice came one or two months too late. Carsten pgprBvF4mMjmx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Paid support
Hi, On 9/2/06, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It might be worth putting together a list of folks interested in doing this on the Gentoo website, under a Third-party Paid Support section. We already have a Support link on the top of www.g.o, it could be on that page. This is a good idea. If you do it, it would be a very good idea to also post basic advice for Gentoo developers who put their name down for this. Folks'll need to know about contracts, documenting their work, and insurance. Per-country advice on independent contracting would also be helpful. We'll also need to sort out a process for handling complaints against developers from the folks they help. Doesn't matter how well we make it clear that these folks are "independent"; their actions will reflect on Gentoo as a whole, and unhappy customers _will_ complain to us sooner or later. Rather than pretent it won't happen, better we're pro-active and have something prepared. Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
On 9/2/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Give us about 3000 more developers, and sure* ;) I don't think that that's good thing to be saying to our users. We didn't need 3000 more developers ... we just needed to give the developers we have more reasonable notice. This is the second time in recent weeks that we've acted like this, by stabilising a major package with little or no notice. It's the same group of folks involved both times. Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Paid support
On 9/2/06, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It might be worth putting together a list of folks interested in doing this on the Gentoo website, under a Third-party Paid Support section. We already have a Support link on the top of www.g.o, it could be on that page. I was thinking about something like this a couple of weeks ago. Similar to the adopt-a-dev project but for those of us who are students (or superhumans) and have enough time and want to make a buck or two with gentoo. We could list companies/people needing help either as a one-time action or on a regular basis (like a few hours a month), and starving and/or bored devs. The company I work for, for example, has gentoo servers only, and they use me as a consultant when they need it (my real job is not about computers). If they didn't have me they'd need somebody to help them, and I can hardly imagine it's the only company in the world in that case. Plus, that would probably make good PR for Gentoo. Denis. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Edgar Hucek wrote: > Apeal on extended testing : > > Developer, please test things more carefull before you > release it. > I already found things which does not compile out of > the box. > 1.) Use wacom does not compile out of the box. You > have to unmask linuxwacom. > 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be > merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. > > It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how > can it happen that there are already know bugs in the > stable distro ? > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 > > Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to > compile with gcc >=4. > > cu > > Edgar (gimli) Hucek Well, thank you for your concern Edgar, however in the future would you please at least look at all the work that went into the release of this. There were months of testing by the releng team in association with the arch teams to ensure that as much was ready to go. I'd like to also point out a few people who went above the call on x86 to get things filed. Ryan Hill (dirtyepic) filed many many many bugs as blockers for 4.1.1 going stable at my request. The Archtesters for all teams as well worked very hard testing things to make sure they worked as w ell. Before it went stable, almost all were stabilized if they could be. There are a few packages not ported yet in the games category but we weren't going to let that stop the progress either. Quite frankly saying that we didn't do enough testing, is a insult to everyone who worked on this release. No release is going to be perfect for us as a project, what we have attempted and I believe been successful with is making the transition as painless as possible. ~Joshua -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFE+es0SENan+PfizARAmeFAJ9cNsqzCtlU3KRu225GB5I1Yz+RGACdElH+ uOxr1Zx35l/K1i6CLeYmpHA= =AZjO -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Paid support
On 9/2/06, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Robin H. Johnson wrote:> On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 08:55:33AM -0500, Mike Doty wrote:>> If that's not good enough for you, please find a distribution that you>> have to pay for like RHEL. Their testing is no better than ours, but >> at least paying something entitles you to bitch at them.> Or consider paying a Gentoo developer [*] as your first level support> person, and liaison with Gentoo. Thus they consult for you, and tell you > if your specific combinations are going to work, and do their hardest to> keep them working.It might be worth putting together a list of folks interested in doingthis on the Gentoo website, under a Third-party Paid Support section. We already have a Support link on the top of www.g.o, it could be on that page.Thanks,DonnieI have done it before, and it's rather rewarding. Both monetarily, and otherwise.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Paid support
Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 08:55:33AM -0500, Mike Doty wrote: >> If that's not good enough for you, please find a distribution that you >> have to pay for like RHEL. Their testing is no better than ours, but >> at least paying something entitles you to bitch at them. > Or consider paying a Gentoo developer [*] as your first level support > person, and liaison with Gentoo. Thus they consult for you, and tell you > if your specific combinations are going to work, and do their hardest to > keep them working. It might be worth putting together a list of folks interested in doing this on the Gentoo website, under a Third-party Paid Support section. We already have a Support link on the top of www.g.o, it could be on that page. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 08:55:33AM -0500, Mike Doty wrote: > If that's not good enough for you, please find a distribution that you > have to pay for like RHEL. Their testing is no better than ours, but > at least paying something entitles you to bitch at them. Or consider paying a Gentoo developer [*] as your first level support person, and liaison with Gentoo. Thus they consult for you, and tell you if your specific combinations are going to work, and do their hardest to keep them working. But don't forget to heed their warnings of what you should and shouldn't do. I believe there are several developers that are unemployed, and would like more work of this nature. * I'm aware that myself and several other developers do this in various ways, most commonly by having our regular employer task us with making sure that changes in Gentoo won't break what we do. However I'm not taking any new consulting clients presently. -- Robin Hugh Johnson E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgp7RyO7m39zC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Edgar Hucek wrote: > Danny van Dyk schrieb: >> Am Samstag, 2. September 2006 13:18 schrieb Edgar Hucek: > 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be > merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. > It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how > can it happen that there are already know bugs in the > stable distro ? > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 > > Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to > compile with gcc >=4. Well, you know - if you go to read the speech-tools/festival & co. bug, and read the ebuild, you'll see that the whole thing and code is one huge mess, that doesn't compile even w/ gcc-3.3 without patching. You'd probably prefer to never put out a new release, I guess? How many people are using this one, and how does it justify delaying the release even more? >>> From my point of view, should it be garanted that a package and >>> depencies compiles when all use flags are enabled. If a depency can't >>> be compiled the use flag and depence should be dissabled/removed from >>> a package. >> Please _think_ before you make such a demand. Just a small investigation >> would show this: >> >> dev-lang/php-5.1.4-r6 has _96_ USE flags. That makes 2^96 = 7.9928+28 >> combinations. Given the (unreasonable) assumption that each compilation >> would only take 1s and each compilation would actually succeed, you'd >> still have ~8e28 seconds. The age of the universe is approximately 4e17 >> seconds. >> >> This hasn't yet investigated allt he possible combinations of packages >> depending on dev-lang/php, or the ~10,000 other packages in the tree. >> >> Danny > > Just a side hint. Try to enable all flags at the first cimpile time would > reduce trys drasticaly ;) > So you say a developer cant't test all useflags? That is a strange > message from you. How can a developer garantee that his package is correct. > Realy funny, i only hear exuses but no real solution for the problem. > The fact is, that long outstanding bugs are simple ignored. If a useflag > would only apply to one package it could be ok, but not when the same > useflag is in other packages and makes this one useflag for the "normal user" > unusable. > > cu > > Edgar (gimli) Hucek > Edgar- You clearly have absolutely no idea how development and testing happens. This is *free* software with no warranty. Our releases are tested with the profile defaults provided in the release. Nothing more. If that's not good enough for you, please find a distribution that you have to pay for like RHEL. Their testing is no better than ours, but at least paying something entitles you to bitch at them. - -- === Mike Doty kingtaco -at- gentoo.org Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead Gentoo Developer Relations Gentoo Recruitment Lead Gentoo Infrastructure GPG: E1A5 1C9C 93FE F430 C1D6 F2AF 806B A2E4 19F4 AE05 === -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBRPmNU4BrouQZ9K4FAQLu0QQAwHVnw/zCbHTjDLb3h50tMiUkdgfhZTpF sEYpsee/LlgYpoVqZoukOQ7X3h8N5uRaHNU/SkcS6blMYGNGhdbPuu9taOylp+x1 6BoXi7FlA3tbSpmRQQdsSO3/fqWwS26lHYKtvkYkhFfqjSP+wd3NZPBlUH4hVpbo id2I+hvq8R0= =3jiw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 02 Sep 2006 16:14:47 +0200: > Edgar Hucek wrote: >> I know my tools but not necessarly the normal user who wanna use gentoo >> and is ending frustrated. > > If the users are too lazy to read the documentation, why should we care > about them? Exactly. To such a "normal user", unwilling to invest the very real time and energy into learning about Gentoo and how to customize it to his wishes, most if not all Gentoo devs will be happy to recommend Ubuntu or whatever. Ubuntu is by all reports a very respectable distribution, arguably one of the most user friendly yet powerful out there. (Linspire/Freespire's probably the most user friendly, disregarding power.) Let Gentoo do what Gentoo does best, cater to those that /like/ that customizability, even, perhaps /because/ of, the challenge of mastering the machine and bending it to our will. There are plenty of other distributions out there for those that are more interested in just having it work, with as little knowledge and effort invested on their part as possible. -- 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@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] cdrtools license issues
On Friday 01 September 2006 20:26, Greg KH wrote:
> So we are just fine, one of the advantages of being a source-based
> distro :)
Um, rereading term three of the GPL, you're right of course. The question
remains how do we flag this. LICENSE="GPL-2 CDDL-Schily" in case of
cdrtools!? Yes, the latter is the license file we have in the tree and
looking at it, the only difference to the CDDL is that it includes an
additional notice, which sets the court to Berlin, Germany.
Also we need to have a file that lists clashing licenses, so Portage (at least
in a future, caring about licenses) will trow warnings, when binary packages
get build. I mean we claim to be a meta-distribution, but I don't think
projects basing their binary distributions on Gentoo can feel safe a bit with
regards to lisensing. We do absolutely nothing to care for that right now.
While thinking about it, other issues came to my mind:
- Ciaran pushed for not installing license/copyright information
in /usr/share/doc/${PF}. But a lot of our licenses in /usr/portage/licenses
list specific copyright holders - of a single package, others have a
different copyright line of course. Wouldn't this be copyright infringement,
to distrbute a images based on Gentoo, but do not include the correct
licenses!?
- There is at least one case we can't map right now. Think about the
following: An ebuild licensed GPL, depends on another one, licensed CPL. Both
licenses are incompatible. It's impossible to distinct (within our
LICENSE="foo" stuff), if the CPL licensed tool is only used to generate
something at compile time and also used but not linked to at runtime, to the
case the GPL licensed application links to a library, the CPL licensed ebuils
provides. Again, binary distributions building on Gentoo are lost.
The package I have in mind is media-gfx/graphviz in this case.
Carsten
pgpgMmHPcOjTZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
I know my tools but not necessarly the normal user who wanna use gentoo and is ending frustrated. cu Edgar (gimli) Hucek Enrico? Is that you in disguise? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Edgar Hucek wrote: > I know my tools but not necessarly the normal user who wanna use gentoo > and is ending frustrated. If the users are too lazy to read the documentation, why should we care about them? -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Edgar Hucek wrote: > Danny van Dyk schrieb: >> This hasn't yet investigated allt he possible combinations of packages >> depending on dev-lang/php, or the ~10,000 other packages in the tree. >> >> Danny > > Just a side hint. Try to enable all flags at the first cimpile time would > reduce trys drasticaly ;) Yes, it would indeed drastically reduce the time to almost zero due to use flag collisions... :) > So you say a developer cant't test all useflags? That is a strange > message from you. No, even PHP devs can't test them all, and definitely not all their combinations (simple maths, see previous mail). Not to mention that some of the flags require commercial software installed that's not in portage, so they are actually unsupported. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Simon Stelling schrieb: > Edgar Hucek wrote: >> Just a side hint. Try to enable all flags at the first cimpile time would >> reduce trys drasticaly ;) > > If you had a look at the php ebuild (just because we took it as example > here), you'd see that it is a bit more complicated than just enabling > everything to have everything tested. > >> So you say a developer cant't test all useflags? That is a strange >> message from you. How can a developer garantee that his package is correct. > > He can't. That's what we're saying. Nobody said we can, nor do, nor want to. > >> Realy funny, i only hear exuses but no real solution for the problem. > > You have heard the real solution for the specific problems you pointed > out: File a bug. You have also heard why it is impossible to guarantee > that it simply works. > >> The fact is, that long outstanding bugs are simple ignored. If a useflag >> would only apply to one package it could be ok, but not when the same >> useflag is in other packages and makes this one useflag for the "normal user" >> unusable. > > man portage: > > package.use > Per-package USE flags. Useful for tracking local USE > flags or for enabling USE flags for certain packages > only. Perhaps you develop GTK and thus you want documen- > tation for it, but you don't want documentation for QT. > Easy as pie my friend! > > Format: > - comments begin with # > - one DEPEND atom per line with space-delimited USE flags > > Example: > # turn on docs for GTK 2.x > =x11-libs/gtk+-2* doc > # disable mysql support for QT > x11-libs/qt -mysql > > Know your tools, man. > I know my tools but not necessarly the normal user who wanna use gentoo and is ending frustrated. cu Edgar (gimli) Hucek -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
Edgar Hucek wrote: > >>From my point of view, should it be garanted that a package and depencies > compiles when all use flags are enabled. If a depency can't be compiled the > use flag and depence should be dissabled/removed from a package. > > > cu > > Edgar (gimli) Hucek Give us about 3000 more developers, and sure* ;) (*)Gentoo as a community distribution guarantees nothing (excluding a few contracts with some sponsors) about really anything we do. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Edgar Hucek wrote: > Just a side hint. Try to enable all flags at the first cimpile time would > reduce trys drasticaly ;) If you had a look at the php ebuild (just because we took it as example here), you'd see that it is a bit more complicated than just enabling everything to have everything tested. > So you say a developer cant't test all useflags? That is a strange > message from you. How can a developer garantee that his package is correct. He can't. That's what we're saying. Nobody said we can, nor do, nor want to. > Realy funny, i only hear exuses but no real solution for the problem. You have heard the real solution for the specific problems you pointed out: File a bug. You have also heard why it is impossible to guarantee that it simply works. > The fact is, that long outstanding bugs are simple ignored. If a useflag > would only apply to one package it could be ok, but not when the same > useflag is in other packages and makes this one useflag for the "normal user" > unusable. man portage: package.use Per-package USE flags. Useful for tracking local USE flags or for enabling USE flags for certain packages only. Perhaps you develop GTK and thus you want documen- tation for it, but you don't want documentation for QT. Easy as pie my friend! Format: - comments begin with # - one DEPEND atom per line with space-delimited USE flags Example: # turn on docs for GTK 2.x =x11-libs/gtk+-2* doc # disable mysql support for QT x11-libs/qt -mysql Know your tools, man. -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
On 02/09/06, Edgar Hucek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Realy funny, i only hear exuses but no real solution for the problem. The universe ending before testing is finished is a pretty good excuse.
[gentoo-dev] Re: The Age of the Universe
Danny van Dyk schrieb: > Am Samstag, 2. September 2006 13:18 schrieb Edgar Hucek: 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how can it happen that there are already know bugs in the stable distro ? http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to compile with gcc >=4. >>> Well, you know - if you go to read the speech-tools/festival & co. >>> bug, and read the ebuild, you'll see that the whole thing and code >>> is one huge mess, that doesn't compile even w/ gcc-3.3 without >>> patching. You'd probably prefer to never put out a new release, I >>> guess? How many people are using this one, and how does it justify >>> delaying the release even more? >> From my point of view, should it be garanted that a package and >> depencies compiles when all use flags are enabled. If a depency can't >> be compiled the use flag and depence should be dissabled/removed from >> a package. > Please _think_ before you make such a demand. Just a small investigation > would show this: > > dev-lang/php-5.1.4-r6 has _96_ USE flags. That makes 2^96 = 7.9928+28 > combinations. Given the (unreasonable) assumption that each compilation > would only take 1s and each compilation would actually succeed, you'd > still have ~8e28 seconds. The age of the universe is approximately 4e17 > seconds. > > This hasn't yet investigated allt he possible combinations of packages > depending on dev-lang/php, or the ~10,000 other packages in the tree. > > Danny Just a side hint. Try to enable all flags at the first cimpile time would reduce trys drasticaly ;) So you say a developer cant't test all useflags? That is a strange message from you. How can a developer garantee that his package is correct. Realy funny, i only hear exuses but no real solution for the problem. The fact is, that long outstanding bugs are simple ignored. If a useflag would only apply to one package it could be ok, but not when the same useflag is in other packages and makes this one useflag for the "normal user" unusable. cu Edgar (gimli) Hucek -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
The Age of the Universe (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1)
Am Samstag, 2. September 2006 13:18 schrieb Edgar Hucek: > >> 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be > >> merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. > >> It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how > >> can it happen that there are already know bugs in the > >> stable distro ? > >> > >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 > >> > >> Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to > >> compile with gcc >=4. > > > > Well, you know - if you go to read the speech-tools/festival & co. > > bug, and read the ebuild, you'll see that the whole thing and code > > is one huge mess, that doesn't compile even w/ gcc-3.3 without > > patching. You'd probably prefer to never put out a new release, I > > guess? How many people are using this one, and how does it justify > > delaying the release even more? > > From my point of view, should it be garanted that a package and > depencies compiles when all use flags are enabled. If a depency can't > be compiled the use flag and depence should be dissabled/removed from > a package. Please _think_ before you make such a demand. Just a small investigation would show this: dev-lang/php-5.1.4-r6 has _96_ USE flags. That makes 2^96 = 7.9928+28 combinations. Given the (unreasonable) assumption that each compilation would only take 1s and each compilation would actually succeed, you'd still have ~8e28 seconds. The age of the universe is approximately 4e17 seconds. This hasn't yet investigated allt he possible combinations of packages depending on dev-lang/php, or the ~10,000 other packages in the tree. Danny -- Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
Jakub Moc schrieb: > Edgar Hucek wrote: >> Apeal on extended testing : >> >> Developer, please test things more carefull before you >> release it. >> I already found things which does not compile out of >> the box. >> 1.) Use wacom does not compile out of the box. You >> have to unmask linuxwacom. > > Shrug. Noone even filed a stabilization bug, ask x11-drivers folks why. > There's one now: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145891 > >> 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be >> merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. >> It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how >> can it happen that there are already know bugs in the >> stable distro ? >> >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 >> >> Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to >> compile with gcc >=4. > > > Well, you know - if you go to read the speech-tools/festival & co. bug, > and read the ebuild, you'll see that the whole thing and code is one > huge mess, that doesn't compile even w/ gcc-3.3 without patching. You'd > probably prefer to never put out a new release, I guess? How many people > are using this one, and how does it justify delaying the release even more? > > >From my point of view, should it be garanted that a package and depencies compiles when all use flags are enabled. If a depency can't be compiled the use flag and depence should be dissabled/removed from a package. cu Edgar (gimli) Hucek -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
On Sat, 02 Sep 2006 12:34:38 +0200 Edgar Hucek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Apeal on extended testing : > > Developer, please test things more carefull before you > release it. There are over 10,000 packages in the tree (11247 to be exact); each of which can be built many ways with USE flags. It is simply not feasible to test all of the packages in all possible combinations in all possible USE configurations for all architectures. The number of combinations is literally astronomical. So, we test what we can, but rely on users to raise a bug in bugzilla when a combination they try, that we haven't, fails. > I already found things which does not compile out of > the box. So raise bugs on bugs.gentoo.org. Make sure you include data about the configuration of your system (i.e. the output of 'emerge --info'). > 1.) Use wacom does not compile out of the box. You > have to unmask linuxwacom. Raise a bug, if one hasn't already been raised. > 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be > merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. Raise a bug, if one hasn't already been raised. > It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how > can it happen that there are already know bugs in the > stable distro ? > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 > Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to > compile with gcc >=4. Er, because the bug is not yet fixed. If we were to hold up the release of everything until all bugs are fixed, we'd never release anything. You have the power to sort out this problem on your own system. Just build the relevant packages with gcc-3.4.6 instead of gcc-4.1.1 (see gcc-config for switching your selected compiler). -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
Edgar Hucek wrote: > Apeal on extended testing : > > Developer, please test things more carefull before you > release it. > I already found things which does not compile out of > the box. > 1.) Use wacom does not compile out of the box. You > have to unmask linuxwacom. Shrug. Noone even filed a stabilization bug, ask x11-drivers folks why. There's one now: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=145891 > 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be > merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. > It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how > can it happen that there are already know bugs in the > stable distro ? > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 > > Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to > compile with gcc >=4. Well, you know - if you go to read the speech-tools/festival & co. bug, and read the ebuild, you'll see that the whole thing and code is one huge mess, that doesn't compile even w/ gcc-3.3 without patching. You'd probably prefer to never put out a new release, I guess? How many people are using this one, and how does it justify delaying the release even more? -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1
Apeal on extended testing : Developer, please test things more carefull before you release it. I already found things which does not compile out of the box. 1.) Use wacom does not compile out of the box. You have to unmask linuxwacom. 2.) Enable the use flage accessibility gnome cant be merged. It fails on compile the speech-tools. It seams that USE flags are not realy tested or how can it happen that there are already know bugs in the stable distro ? http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116030 Festival and the speech-tools are well know not to compile with gcc >=4. cu Edgar (gimli) Hucek -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Democracy: No silver bullet
Donnie Berkholz wrote: > When I think about where Gentoo was when we turned into a democracy > years ago, and where Gentoo is now, I don't see much of a difference on > the large scale. We lack any global vision for where Gentoo is going, we > can't agree on who our audience is, and everyone's just working on > pretty much whatever they feel like. > > When I joined, Daniel Robbins was in charge, period. Seemant Kulleen and > Jon Portnoy were basically his lieutenants. What Daniel said was what > happened, and woe to anyone who angered him. This generally worked out > pretty well, but _as Gentoo grew, it didn't scale_. Everything > significant still had to go through Daniel for personal approval. While I'm not a developer, I was thinking along similar lines some time ago. Or make it like a year ago? Good leadership is important in many undertakings of the real life, including (but not limited to) open-source projects. After some time spent using Gentoo some comparisons against other known projects naturally came to my mind. Linux kernel, Debian, PCLinuxOS - they were first to think about. From these I concluded that in some brilliant cases a project with a strong leadership, not fearing to make unpopular decisions sometimes, progresses ahead nicely in the long run. From the aforementioned three, Debian with its social contract, goals and the way it is maintained is an exceptional phenomenon. It seems to me that the key to a success lies in a good, respectful leadership, trust and good communication. I'm sure that at least some of you read kerneltrap, but this recent topic concerning NetBSD future (or lack thereof?) has some sad truths in it [1]. While I do not fear end of the Gentoo project (far from it!) I too sense some lack of a general vision of where is it going now. Not delving into philosophical considerations of democracy vs dictatorship I feel that the current democracy approach Gentoo utilizes makes sense. But there are many examples of healthy democracies, where citizens are seriously involved in the process (western Europe countries, in general) as well as weak democracies, where even though the process exists citizens feel powerless (like in some new democracies in eastern Europe countries). I suppose that there is a way that Gentoo can follow, only that its leaders, developers and users need to see it clearly. Is there a publicly visible page that contains current goals for new releases? Where all sub-project leaders could add their own goals, coherent with the general vision? I couldn't find it, but maybe I haven't looked in the right places? And if it doesnt' exist I am convinced that it should be created, say, for 2007.0 release at least. Ubuntu has such plans, for one, so all developers and users are able to learn what to expect from the upcoming release. It also serves as a check list of what the expected goals were and what the outcome was. Maybe I should raise such concerns to the User Representatives first, but the overall flow of ideas was IMO rather worth to be sent to the mailing list in a complete form. If you feel otherwise, I apologize. With best regards, Wiktor Wandachowicz [1] NetBSD: Founder Fears End Of Project http://kerneltrap.org/node/7061 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
