On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:11:19AM +0200, Nicolas Bock wrote:
Hi,
I would like to add neomutt to the tree. This new package is meant as
an alternative and not a replacement of the existing mutt package.
Thanks for all of the great suggestions and feedback!
This is round two. I have update th
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 10:34:53AM +0200, Patrice Clement wrote:
Hi Nicolas
See my comments inline.
Monday 31 Jul 2017 09:23:51, Nicolas Bock wrote :
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:11:19AM +0200, Nicolas Bock wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I would like to add neomutt to the tree. This new package is meant as
>an
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 02:15:16PM +0200, Floyd Anderson wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
below just some remarks from me.
On Mo, 31 Jul 09:23:51 +0200
Nicolas Bock wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:11:19AM +0200, Nicolas Bock wrote:
Hi,
I would like to add neomutt to the tree. This new package is meant
On 10/08/17 11:42, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:50:45 +1000
> "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
>
>> On 10/08/17 06:35, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>>> FYI binpkgs have no hash. If someone did something malicious within
>>> the binhost to the binpkgs. You have no way of know
On 10/08/17 11:47, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 11:25:34 +1000
> "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
>
>> On 09/08/17 10:43, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>>> Also your redistributing another's package
>>> in binary format which may not be legally allowed.
>>
>> Just to clarify,
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 11:25:34 +1000
"Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
> On 09/08/17 10:43, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > Also your redistributing another's package
> > in binary format which may not be legally allowed.
>
> Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting redistributing license-encumbered
> p
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 10:50:45 +1000
"Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
> On 10/08/17 06:35, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > FYI binpkgs have no hash. If someone did something malicious within
> > the binhost to the binpkgs. You have no way of knowing. Yes the
> > same can happen with ebuilds and manife
On 09/08/17 10:43, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> Also your redistributing another's package
> in binary format which may not be legally allowed.
Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting redistributing license-encumbered
packages. Since binary packages are managed by the system administrator,
not Gen
Hello,
I am not a developer, but most of the discussion pertaining to the
handbook that has happened on user-oriented discussion forums has
never resulted in any changes.
Due to lack of recent inspiration, I have reproduced some of my
comments on a thread in gentoo-user below.
On Fri, Jul 28, 20
On 10/08/17 06:35, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> FYI binpkgs have no hash. If someone did something malicious within the
> binhost to the binpkgs. You have no way of knowing. Yes the same can
> happen with ebuilds and manifest. But easy to sync portage and see if a
> manifest has changed.
This i
Hey there,
it's time we do a proper lead election and have a toolchain meeting again.
So, here's the plan:
1) team lead election:
* Nominations from now until August 18, by e-mailing to the toolchain alias
* Voting (Helios) August 19-25
I'm volunteering as organizer, since I won't run myself.
Just to clarify, the contenders for no binpkg would be the
following, potentially more.
- ebuilds that are fetch restricted
- ebuilds that installs files unchanged, like kernel sources
- Binary ebuilds, -bin, that just use src_install and do not build
anything
There may be some other cases,
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 22:23:41 +0200
Francesco Riosa wrote:
> 2017-08-09 17:33 GMT+02:00 William L. Thomson Jr. :
>
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:07:04 +1000
> > "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
> >
> > > > What then is the benefit? If what is installed is the same from
> > > > package manager or binpkg. A
2017-08-09 17:33 GMT+02:00 William L. Thomson Jr. :
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:07:04 +1000
> "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
>
> > > What then is the benefit? If what is installed is the same from
> > > package manager or binpkg. Also your redistributing another's
> > > package in binary format which ma
On 2017-08-08 13:05, Amy Liffey wrote:
> Hello,
> The following packages are up for grabs:
>
> x11-wm/afterstep
> mail-client/nmh
> dev-util/wsta
> dev-util/bats
> app-admin/yadm
>
> Best regards,
> Amy Liffey
>
I'll take dev-util/bats, my proxy is my mentor polynomia
On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:07:04 +1000
"Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote:
> > What then is the benefit? If what is installed is the same from
> > package manager or binpkg. Also your redistributing another's
> > package in binary format which may not be legally allowed.
>
> The difference is that how the
16 matches
Mail list logo
