On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:35:36PM -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP 27?
Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html
I'm strongly in favour of moving
On 10-04-2008 16:35:36 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP 27?
Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html
See also:
Robin H. Johnson wrote:
My specific interest in it is for having a sane UID/GIDs that are
identical between a set of machines, regardless of the order packages
are emerged in.
Same here. Which is why I'm hoping to revitalize GLEP 27.
--
Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My specific interest in it is for having a sane UID/GIDs that are
identical between a set of machines, regardless of the order packages
are emerged in.
I was initially surprised to see Gentoo didn't have written standards
for UID/GID management, but don't see many other distros having one
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:37:31 -0700
Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's why I setup them up with the ability to rsync it, and they
never got back to me on that, nor used it ever.
Hrm, curious. They seem interested and alive currently. Perhaps it's
worth
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:35:36 -0400
Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP
27?
Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html
This was my SoC
So the point is, our current 2.6.24 kernel is safe.
I can *not* confirm this. Just some days ago, I compiled
hardened-sources-2.6.24 (which uses genpatches-2.6.24-5;
current gentoo-sources uses genpatches-2.6.24-6, but the
difference is obviously not important here [it involves
just an #include
Vaeth wrote:
Result: Compiles fine with gcc-4.3 on x86 but dies immediately
at boot (before printing anything) unless acpi=off is used.
(And just to be sure, I disabled every acpi feature except
general acpi support - same result).
Please file a bug at bugs,gentoo.org, our hardened team surely
