[gentoo-dev] bash-completion-2.1-r1

2013-09-09 Thread Michał Górny
Hello, all. I'd like to ask finally: who feels himself responsible for deploying bashcomp-2.1-r1? Does he have any kind of plan? Does anyone care at all? Do I have to say it's pretty far from professional to commit it half-working, with no clear information how to proceed, neither for users nor

Re: [gentoo-dev] bash-completion-2.1-r1

2013-09-09 Thread Samuli Suominen
On 09/09/13 12:24, Michał Górny wrote: Hello, all. I'd like to ask finally: who feels himself responsible for deploying bashcomp-2.1-r1? Does he have any kind of plan? Does anyone care at all? 2.1-r1 works great here and I don't see any other work left than maybe a wiki page for instructing

Re: [gentoo-dev] bash-completion-2.1-r1

2013-09-09 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 2013-09-09, o godz. 12:50:03 Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): On 09/09/13 12:24, Michał Górny wrote: Do I have to say it's pretty far from professional to commit it half-working, with no clear information how to proceed, neither for users nor for developers? As far as

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-09 Thread Martin Vaeth
Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: You will be expected to fix them, and `append-flags -fno-stack-protector` is not an acceptable fix. I guess there might be some projects with special assembler code where this is the only possiblity. For your information, I attach my list of packages (of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-09 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: You will be expected to fix them, and `append-flags -fno-stack-protector` is not an acceptable fix. You can't champion for more secure defaults and then just disable them when they get in your way. Why not? Surely a system

[gentoo-dev] Re: bash-completion-2.1-r1

2013-09-09 Thread Nikos Chantziaras
On 09/09/13 13:05, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-09-09, o godz. 12:50:03 Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): On 09/09/13 12:24, Michał Górny wrote: 1. how to properly disable completions the 'new way'? something like

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: bash-completion-2.1-r1

2013-09-09 Thread Michał Górny
Dnia 2013-09-09, o godz. 18:12:08 Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com napisał(a): On 09/09/13 13:05, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-09-09, o godz. 12:50:03 Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): On 09/09/13 12:24, Michał Górny wrote: 1. how to properly disable completions the

[gentoo-dev] RFC: directory-based wrapping of Python scripts

2013-09-09 Thread Michał Górny
Hello, all. I've been working on solving the issues we had with Python script wrapping. I'd like to present the best solution I could think of, along with a technical demo, and ask for your opinion. Wrapping Python scripts currently involves renaming them through appending ${EPYTHON} suffix.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] gnome2-utils.eclass add support for gdk-pixbuf cache update

2013-09-09 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
As a follow up to this discussion, I came with the attached patch. It appears to work ok for regular merges and binpkg merges with FEATURES=collision-protect. Per my reading of PMS it does not appear to violate anything so I guess it is ok. -- Gilles Dartiguelongue e...@gentoo.org Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] gnome2-utils.eclass add support for gdk-pixbuf cache update

2013-09-09 Thread hasufell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/10/2013 02:29 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: As a follow up to this discussion, I came with the attached patch. It appears to work ok for regular merges and binpkg merges with FEATURES=collision-protect. Per my reading of PMS it does

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] gnome2-utils.eclass add support for gdk-pixbuf cache update

2013-09-09 Thread Alex Xu
On 09/09/13 08:29 PM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: Index: gdk-pixbuf-2.28.2.ebuild === RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/x11-libs/gdk-pixbuf/gdk-pixbuf-2.28.2.ebuild,v retrieving

[gentoo-dev] Re: bash-completion-2.1-r1

2013-09-09 Thread Duncan
Michał Górny posted on Mon, 09 Sep 2013 17:18:50 +0200 as excerpted: Dnia 2013-09-09, o godz. 18:12:08 Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com napisał(a): On 09/09/13 13:05, Michał Górny wrote: Trying plain: complete -r git it removes git completion indeed. But when I type 'git

[gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-09 Thread Ryan Hill
On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 08:21:35 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: So does anyone have any objections to making -fstack-protector the default? Now is the time to speak up. So, in this world of all-or-nothing we want

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-09 Thread Peter Stuge
Ryan Hill wrote: I don't like creating more work for people, so I want to be sure there is consensus on this first. So far it sounds like there is. I think there will come enough objections, but only down the road, and only from people who don't want to care about quality. Don't let that stop

Re: [gentoo-dev] git-r3: initial draft for review

2013-09-09 Thread Peter Stuge
Markos Chandras wrote: the whole eclass is inside the if [[ ! ${_GIT_R3} ]] block. Rather than putting the whole eclass inside a block like that maybe it's possible to test for that condition and exit early? //Peter