[gentoo-dev] Re: Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
"Chrissy Fullam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:01:39 -0700: > [T]he update is simple: the untimely and quite unexpected surgical > "complication" resulting in the death of my mother has set back a > number of schedules, personal/professional/gentoo[.] > As a result, projects involving release engineering, developer > relations, and events will be delayed until further notice. Ouch! Condolences then... and understanding. I'm sure other users will be understanding too, as soon as they get word of the circumstances. -- 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@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
> I thought we had learnt something about not communicating with our userbase, > but > it looks like this lesson has already been forgotten. While I appreciate there > probably are valid reasons for the delay of the beta and the release of > 2008.0, > I don't think there is any excuse not to update the published release > schedule, > nor for the utter lack of communication about this issue with our users. A > short > message on the frontpage of www.gentoo.org with a new (even if tentative) ETA, > and some kind of explanation for the delay would certainly be much > appreciated. While communication was sent via unofficial means we had intended to project a level of understanding to those actively involved, the update is simple: the untimely and quite unexpected surgical "complication" resulting in the death of my mother has set back a number of schedules, personal/professional/gentoo, for both myself and wolf31o2. We hope developers and users alike can be somewhat sympathetic as the family tries to cope with our loss of this truly dynamic and incredible woman. As a result, projects involving release engineering, developer relations, and events will be delayed until further notice. Kind regards, Christina Fullam Gentoo Developer Relations Lead | Gentoo Public Relations -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] update-modules and modules.d -> modprobe.d
just a little background for the (bi)curious modutils-2.4.x provided a way for the user to customize things: /etc/modules.conf. here users could control aliases and options and do all sort of neat tricks when loading/unloading modules. the problem was that it didnt allow for packages to easily provide their own little snippets. should all those packages get folded into modules.conf ? should you just grep/cat the file onto modules.conf ? it's a nightmare. so distros invented /etc/modules.d/. now packages could manage their little pieces in this directory all by themselves. the only problem was that modutils knew nothing of this. it only knew modules.conf. so distros had to write a little bit of glue where the conf file would be autogenerated by all the pieces in modules.d. life, while better, is still kind of a pain. when module-init-tools-2.6.x came out, peeps had learned from the past. this means they changed two things: they included native support for a modprobe.d directory and they removed support for certain syntax deemed a pita. this syntax change is why we have a new modprobe.d instead of just using the old modules.d. however, the behavior is this: if /etc/modprobe.conf exists, use that, otherwise scan the modprobe.d directory. now distros have yet another problem. they've got packages that provide old snippets in /etc/modules.d/ and new snippets in /etc/modprobe.d/. so in comes the lube again. we automatically combine these directories and form an old-compatible modules.conf file and a new compatible modprobe.conf. what would be ideal is for all of this lube to go away. thus the latest update-modules script whines like a brat whenever a file is found in /etc/modules.d/. by being proactive here and scuttling all the modules.d pieces, we will be left with only /etc/modprobe.d/. that means no more annoying messages during boot "Updating modules. ..." which serves to slow things down. on my amd64 system with very few files, that still takes ~2 friggin seconds. less stuff to do at boot => faster boot time => maintainers get a whiny notice -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Re: Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
Sylvain Alain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 22 Mar 2008 15:39:18 +: [snip a scrambled HTML mess] Do you realize what a scrambled mess your post looked like to those who choose not to enable HTML for security or other reasons? Please set the message to plain text next time. You'll definitely get more and more favorable readers that way, as many will ignore the mess that was, or worse yet, treat it as spam and killfile the sender. Whatever the parent said, I agree with the OP. Some sort of 2008.0 status update would be nice, even if it's simply "We're still working on it. Currently, we're targeting a media release in xxx." Add beta info and other details as available/desired. -- 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@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Last rites: sci-libs/libgdgeda
# Denis Dupeyron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (22 Mar 2008) # Not needed anymore. Was only used by old versions of # sci-libs/libgeda which were just punted. Will be removed # in 30 days. sci-libs/libgdgeda -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
Hi, Ben de Groot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I thought we had learnt something about not communicating with our > userbase, but it looks like this lesson has already been forgotten. > While I appreciate there probably are valid reasons for the delay of > the beta and the release of 2008.0, I don't think there is any excuse > not to update the published release schedule, nor for the utter lack > of communication about this issue with our users. A short message on > the frontpage of www.gentoo.org with a new (even if tentative) ETA, > and some kind of explanation for the delay would certainly be much > appreciated. Yes please, people are asking a lot on the forums, so a news item would be nice. I contributed a rough draft but I have not enough insight into the reasoning to make it something proper...a "2008.0 will be delayed but we are still working on it" would be sufficient in my eyes. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode http://www.faulhammer.org/> signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo Enterprise 10000 support and developer access
Raúl-Ferris, This past week I made an e10k I own/operate accessible [i.e. the SSP] to Mark Kettenis the OpenBSD-sparc maintainer. And Mark added support for the Sun Enterprise 1 (SMP and e10k RTC support). Theo thought it was very beneficial as a few bugs effecting other systems were picked up in the process. I thought I would extend the opportunity to the Gentoo-sparc team. Mike Spenard -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
Yeah, they should at least post on note on the gentoo.org to announce the delay.SalutalpSylvain> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:27:59 +0100> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-> Hash: SHA1> > I thought we had learnt something about not communicating with our userbase, but> it looks like this lesson has already been forgotten. While I appreciate there> probably are valid reasons for the delay of the beta and the release of 2008.0,> I don't think there is any excuse not to update the published release schedule,> nor for the utter lack of communication about this issue with our users. A short> message on the frontpage of www.gentoo.org with a new (even if tentative) ETA,> and some kind of explanation for the delay would certainly be much appreciated.> > Thanks,> > Ben> > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-> Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org> > iD8DBQFH5N8vi+u7I1rvkiYRAqGBAJ49SeDwGgvVpTdMCI8M1DZ5hncuBwCZAWXd> GsgP7gY2xuOARHmCcbbx6xU=> =W6u7> -END PGP SIGNATURE-> -- > gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list> _ This Valentine's Day, get creative and show your sweetheart how much you care with flair! Find fun date ideas here! http://g.msn.ca/ca55/224
[gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I thought we had learnt something about not communicating with our userbase, but it looks like this lesson has already been forgotten. While I appreciate there probably are valid reasons for the delay of the beta and the release of 2008.0, I don't think there is any excuse not to update the published release schedule, nor for the utter lack of communication about this issue with our users. A short message on the frontpage of www.gentoo.org with a new (even if tentative) ETA, and some kind of explanation for the delay would certainly be much appreciated. Thanks, Ben -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH5N8vi+u7I1rvkiYRAqGBAJ49SeDwGgvVpTdMCI8M1DZ5hncuBwCZAWXd GsgP7gY2xuOARHmCcbbx6xU= =W6u7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
