Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

Dnia 11 stycznia 2018 07:54:40 CET, Mike Gilbert napisał(a): >On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Michał Górny >wrote: >> W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶45 -0500, użytkownik Mike >Gilbert >> napisał: >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:56 PM, Zac Medico

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] profiles.desc: Reduce the status of most exp profiles to dev

> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Michał Górny wrote: >> So you're *promoting* the ones considered to be broken from "exp" >> to "dev"? > Please point me to one bit of documentation that says that 'dev' is > better than 'exp' because I haven't been able to find any. Well, > except the fact that PMS

[gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

On 07-01-2018 21:25:28 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > I'd like to follow this with a more precise proposal. Namely, redefine > the current profile statuses to apply the following: > > a. stable -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages are errors, > > b. exp -> fully tested, all depgraph breakages

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] profiles.desc: Reduce the status of most exp profiles to dev

Dnia 11 stycznia 2018 07:07:30 CET, Ulrich Mueller napisał(a): >> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Michał Górny wrote: > >> Given the new semantic meaning of profile statuses, > >Huh? Have I missed something? Please provide a pointer to the >discussion.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 08:55:11AM +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: > Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... Elitist seems too kind a word. Knee-jerk reaction, petty vendetta, impulsive emotional reaction comes to mind - instead of articulating and implementing a vision for the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶45 -0500, użytkownik Mike Gilbert > napisał: >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:56 PM, Zac Medico wrote: >> > On 01/10/2018 02:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> > > Enable

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] profiles.desc: Reduce the status of most exp profiles to dev

> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Michał Górny wrote: > Given the new semantic meaning of profile statuses, Huh? Have I missed something? Please provide a pointer to the discussion. > reduce most of the current exp profiles that are known or likely to > have broken depgraph to dev status. Those

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > Andreas K. Huettel posted on Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:12:47 +0100 as excerpted: > >> Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2018, 18:16:33 CET schrieb Vincent-Xavier JUMEL: >>> Le 2018-01-10 10:53, Michał Górny a écrit : >>> > Last I checked,

[gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Andreas K. Huettel posted on Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:12:47 +0100 as excerpted: > Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2018, 18:16:33 CET schrieb Vincent-Xavier JUMEL: >> Le 2018-01-10 10:53, Michał Górny a écrit : >> > Last I checked, Gentoo was a Linux distribution. However, some people >> > prefer to turn it

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/2] profiles.desc: Move known-good amd64 profiles to exp

--- profiles/profiles.desc | 14 +++--- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/profiles/profiles.desc b/profiles/profiles.desc index b929cb89e109..44709983f9e3 100644 --- a/profiles/profiles.desc +++ b/profiles/profiles.desc @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ alpha

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] profiles.desc: Reduce the status of most exp profiles to dev

Given the new semantic meaning of profile statuses, reduce most of the current exp profiles that are known or likely to have broken depgraph to dev status. Those profiles will be moved one-by-one back to exp once the integrity of their depgraph is confirmed. --- profiles/profiles.desc | 248

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶45 -0500, użytkownik Mike Gilbert napisał: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:56 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > > On 01/10/2018 02:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Enable repoman checks on exp profiles by default to improve > > > the dependency graph

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Hi, "Andreas K. Huettel" writes: > If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on > gentoo-dev, > - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask him/her to > forward your message, With this item in mind, shall we set the default

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

Hi MJ, "M. J. Everitt" writes: > Not entirely as a #gentoo-nit-pick .. I'm slightly unclear on the > different between 2.6.16+ and 2.6.32+ .. should this potentially be > 2.16.16-32 perhaps [2.6.16~32 even] or is this more obvious only to me, > and more confusing to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2018, 18:16:33 CET schrieb Vincent-Xavier JUMEL: > Le 2018-01-10 10:53, Michał Górny a écrit : > > Last I checked, Gentoo was a Linux distribution. However, some people > > prefer to turn it into open discussion forum that has nothing to do > > with > > making a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

> Does being 'struck off' the list in this way apply to devs, including > Council and comrel members? So far noone has even considered "striking" devs off the list. If this even were to happen ever, it would have to be backed by a full comrel team decision / vote. And these don't happen often,

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 2018-01-10 22:53, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:48:32 -0500 > "Aaron W. Swenson" wrote: > > Modified a bit. This should show for anyone who has GnuCash installed. > > For anyone who has any version of GnuCash installed, either now or at > any point in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 23:35, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 6:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > >> I think Roy's point is quite valid .. if you want to cut out users from >> contribution why are you even posting on -dev ML in the first place? > Probably because we don't want

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 6:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 10/01/18 23:20, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Roy Bamford wrote: >>> Being somwhat old and cynical, I'm seeing signs of history >>> repeating itself. >>> >>> Does

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: ideas for fixing OpenRC checkpath issue

On 01/10/2018 05:18 PM, James Le Cuirot wrote: > > The init script used to call chown/chmod -R, which is > obviously bad. I've compromised by only calling these on the > directories themselves (ignoring symlinks). I believe this is safe > because it's not possible to create hard linked

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 23:20, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Roy Bamford wrote: >> Being somwhat old and cynical, I'm seeing signs of history >> repeating itself. >> >> Does being 'struck off' the list in this way apply to devs, including >> Council and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Roy Bamford wrote: > > Being somwhat old and cynical, I'm seeing signs of history > repeating itself. > > Does being 'struck off' the list in this way apply to devs, including > Council and comrel members? > It would seem that this

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

On 01/10/2018 02:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Enable repoman checks on exp profiles by default to improve > the dependency graph integrity on those profiles and help them on their > way towards stable status. This is possible now that the dependency > graph problems are warnings rather than

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:48:32 -0500 "Aaron W. Swenson" wrote: > Modified a bit. This should show for anyone who has GnuCash installed. For anyone who has any version of GnuCash installed, either now or at any point in the future. (See the recent thread on expiring news

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

Modified a bit. This should show for anyone who has GnuCash installed. The 2.7.3 ebuild I have in my overlay does have a postinst note about this as well, but I think this is important enough to tell them as soon as possible and on systems that may never have had GnuCash installed but will be

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 2018-01-10 19:33, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 01/10/2018 07:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > > It is imperative that you back up any files or databases that GnuCash > > uses in case you run into an issue with 2.7+ and want or need to revert > > back to 2.6. > > This seems to imply that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 2018.01.09 21:20, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: [snip] > * Obviously, repeated off-topic posting as well as behaviour against > the > Code of Conduct [2] will lead to revocation of the posting > permission. > [snip] > -- > Andreas K. Hüttel > dilfri...@gentoo.org > Gentoo Linux developer >

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

Enable repoman checks on exp profiles by default to improve the dependency graph integrity on those profiles and help them on their way towards stable status. This is possible now that the dependency graph problems are warnings rather than errors. --- repoman/pym/repoman/argparser.py | 2 +- 1

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: ideas for fixing OpenRC checkpath issue

On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 18:07:41 -0600 William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > please take a look at the following issue. > > https://github.com/openrc/openrc/issues/195 > > The first part of the fix is committed to master as shown on the issue; > checkpath should *never* follow

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 15∶39 -0500, użytkownik Michael Orlitzky napisał: > On 01/10/2018 03:13 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Remove empty directories in install-qa-check phase in order to prevent > > Portage from installing them, and therefore from developers relying > > on them being

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: ideas for fixing OpenRC checkpath issue

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:25:55PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/10/2018 01:04 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:19:24PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > > >> Ultimately, it's not safe to chown/chmod/setfacl/whatever in a directory > >> that is not writable only

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 2018-01-10 19:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:35:52 +0100 > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > On 01/10/2018 07:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > > > Display-If-Installed: >=app-office/gnucash-2.7.0 > > > > And we might want to display it before users

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

On 01/10/2018 01:15 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/10/2018 03:55 PM, Zac Medico wrote: >>> >>> This is going to break a lot of packages whose build systems create e.g. >>> /var/lib/foo and do nothing with it immediately. The ebuild should be >>> calling keepdir on those paths, but how would

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 2018-01-10 22:38, Peter Volkov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson > wrote: > > > Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change > > > > Aaron, but why do we need this news item? 2.7 version is a development > version that is not supposed to be used by end

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

On 01/10/2018 03:55 PM, Zac Medico wrote: >> >> This is going to break a lot of packages whose build systems create e.g. >> /var/lib/foo and do nothing with it immediately. The ebuild should be >> calling keepdir on those paths, but how would anyone know that? > > If we consider that portage

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:48 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 10/01/18 19:31, Alec Warner wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > >> W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner >> napisał: >> > On Wed, Jan

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

On 01/10/2018 12:39 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/10/2018 03:13 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> Remove empty directories in install-qa-check phase in order to prevent >> Portage from installing them, and therefore from developers relying >> on them being installed. > > This is going to break a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 19:31, Alec Warner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny > wrote: > > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner > napisał: > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 22:38 +0300, Peter Volkov wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson org> wrote: > > Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change > > Aaron, but why do we need this news item? 2.7 version is a > development version that is not supposed to be used

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

On 01/10/2018 03:13 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Remove empty directories in install-qa-check phase in order to prevent > Portage from installing them, and therefore from developers relying > on them being installed. This is going to break a lot of packages whose build systems create e.g.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

On 01/10/2018 12:13 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 11∶55 -0500, użytkownik Alec Warner > napisał: >> Please link to documentation on keepdir (e.g. >> https://devmanual.gentoo.org/function-reference/install-functions/index.html) >> in the helper? >> >> I'm not sure

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] dep_zapdeps: install new package, allow upgrade (bug 643974)

On 01/10/2018 09:00 AM, Alec Warner wrote: > The code lgtm. Thanks! > Slightly unsure if we need an entirely new test, as opposed to just > generalizing the test cases (like you did the code). But either way is > probably fine. Well, it seems like the only benefit of combining the tests

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 11∶55 -0500, użytkownik Alec Warner napisał: > Please link to documentation on keepdir (e.g. > https://devmanual.gentoo.org/function-reference/install-functions/index.html) > in the helper? > > I'm not sure there is better keepdir document? Done. > > Also

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

Remove empty directories in install-qa-check phase in order to prevent Portage from installing them, and therefore from developers relying on them being installed. The PMS specifies the behavior upon merging empty directories as undefined, and specifically prohibits ebuilds from attempting to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 09-01-2018 22:20:56 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on > gentoo-dev, > - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask him/her to > forward your message, > - or ask any Gentoo developer of your choice to get you

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 14∶31 -0500, użytkownik Alec Warner napisał: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner > > napisał: > > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 18∶16 +0100, użytkownik Vincent-Xavier JUMEL napisał: > Le 2018-01-10 10:53, Michał Górny a écrit : > > Last I checked, Gentoo was a Linux distribution. However, some people > > prefer to turn it into open discussion forum that has nothing to do > > with > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 9:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change > Aaron, but why do we need this news item? 2.7 version is a development version that is not supposed to be used by end users. As far as I understand this backup is a temporary

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner > napisał: > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:35:52 +0100 Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 01/10/2018 07:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > > Display-If-Installed: >=app-office/gnucash-2.7.0 > > And we might want to display it before users actually upgrades if it > is for backing up an auto migrated

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner napisał: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner > > napisał: > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 01/10/2018 07:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > Display-If-Installed: >=app-office/gnucash-2.7.0 And we might want to display it before users actually upgrades if it is for backing up an auto migrated change? Since it doesn't require user changes I'm not entirely sure news item is correct

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On 01/10/2018 07:31 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > It is imperative that you back up any files or databases that GnuCash > uses in case you run into an issue with 2.7+ and want or need to revert > back to 2.6. This seems to imply that upgrading from 2.6 to 2.7+ does not require any changes /

[gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

Please review. Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change Author: Aaron W. Swenson Posted: 2018-01-11 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 2.0 Display-If-Installed: >=app-office/gnucash-2.7.0 Along with changes to updates to use modern libraries, GnuCash 2.7+ has changed the schema [1]

[gentoo-dev] Last-rites: dev-perl/SVN-Simple

# Kent Fredric (10 Jan 2018) # Dead upstream, Broken since 2009. # Bug #644146. Removal in 30 days dev-perl/SVN-Simple pgp1f0Hmg13QE.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: ideas for fixing OpenRC checkpath issue

On 01/10/2018 02:19 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 01/09/2018 07:07 PM, William Hubbs wrote >> >> However, I'm not sure how to deal with the hard link issue in a way that >> will not break service scripts. >> > > Systemd mitigates this by enabling the fs.protected_hardlinks sysctl by > default,

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: ideas for fixing OpenRC checkpath issue

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:19:24PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: *snip* > Ultimately, it's not safe to chown/chmod/setfacl/whatever in a directory > that is not writable only by yourself and root. Let me try to phrase this another way. If the directory we are in is not owned by us or root and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Le 2018-01-10 10:53, Michał Górny a écrit : Last I checked, Gentoo was a Linux distribution. However, some people prefer to turn it into open discussion forum that has nothing to do with making a distribution. No it has. Giving power to a subset of users, denying interaction with future

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner > napisał: >> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel >> wrote: >> > During the last Gentoo council meeting, the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] dep_zapdeps: install new package, allow upgrade (bug 643974)

The code lgtm. Slightly unsure if we need an entirely new test, as opposed to just generalizing the test cases (like you did the code). But either way is probably fine. -A On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > Prefer to install a new package in order to allow

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

Please link to documentation on keepdir (e.g. https://devmanual.gentoo.org/function-reference/install-functions/index.html) in the helper? I'm not sure there is better keepdir document? Also looking at https://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-reference/ebuild/ It says "keepdir functions the same as

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check: Do not install empty directories

Remove empty directories in install-qa-check phase in order to prevent Portage from installing them, and therefore from developers relying on them being installed. The PMS specifies the behavior upon merging empty directories as undefined, and specifically prohibits ebuilds from attempting to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 01/10/2018 09:55 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 10/01/18 08:55, Lars Wendler wrote: >> Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... > Gentoo has already had the reputation of being an elitist club for > years. As such I'd like to see steps to remedy this status, rather than >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 14:55, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 10/01/18 08:55, Lars Wendler wrote: >> Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... > Gentoo has already had the reputation of being an elitist club for > years. As such I'd like to see steps to remedy this status, rather than > taking

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 08:55, Lars Wendler wrote: > Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... Gentoo has already had the reputation of being an elitist club for years. As such I'd like to see steps to remedy this status, rather than taking steps like this, which just exacerbates the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 13:49, kuzetsa wrote: > On 01/10/2018 05:57 AM, David Seifert wrote: >> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 08:55 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: >>> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:48:56 +0300 Eray Aslan wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:20:56PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > * Posting to the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

On 10/01/18 14:00, kuzetsa wrote: > On 01/09/2018 08:21 AM, Aaron Bauman wrote: >> On January 8, 2018 9:39:47 PM EST, Benda Xu wrote: >>> Hi kuzetsa, >>> >>> kuzetsa writes: >>> The term "beyond" feels wrong & confusing. (Not sure what to replace

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

On 01/09/2018 08:21 AM, Aaron Bauman wrote: > > On January 8, 2018 9:39:47 PM EST, Benda Xu wrote: >> Hi kuzetsa, >> >> kuzetsa writes: >> >>> The term "beyond" feels wrong & confusing. >>> (Not sure what to replace it with though) >> How about this? >> >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 01/10/2018 05:57 AM, David Seifert wrote: > On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 08:55 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: >> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:48:56 +0300 Eray Aslan wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:20:56PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: net-misc/openssh/

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 13∶26 +, użytkownik Ian Whyman napisał: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, at 12:52 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 08∶35 +, użytkownik Mike Frysinger > > napisał: > > > commit: e65003579e31be4ff949cfa66df2511ecd4c44a0 > > > Author:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: net-misc/openssh/

On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, at 12:52 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 08∶35 +, użytkownik Mike Frysinger > napisał: > > commit: e65003579e31be4ff949cfa66df2511ecd4c44a0 > > Author: Mike Frysinger gentoo org> > > AuthorDate: Wed Jan 10 08:28:35 2018 + > >

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: net-misc/openssh/

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 08∶35 +, użytkownik Mike Frysinger napisał: > commit: e65003579e31be4ff949cfa66df2511ecd4c44a0 > Author: Mike Frysinger gentoo org> > AuthorDate: Wed Jan 10 08:28:35 2018 + > Commit: Mike Frysinger gentoo org> > CommitDate: Wed Jan 10

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: dev-libs/libFuzzer

# Michał Górny (10 Jan 2018) # The Fuzzer library is now installed as part of core LLVM. That's # sys-devel/llvm in LLVM 5, and sys-libs/compiler-rt-sanitizers # in LLVM 6 and newer. The separate ebuild was never approved by LLVM # maintainers or actually maintained, and is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2018, 10:53:39 CET schrieb Michał Górny: > > I guess you should have voiced your opinion back when discussion was > taking place instead of being hostile *now* because the Council listened > to what the developers requested. > > And if you are curious, then I've been

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 08:55 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:48:56 +0300 Eray Aslan wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:20:56PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > > * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers > > > and > > > whitelisted additional

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

W dniu wto, 09.01.2018 o godzinie 17∶08 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner napisał: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Andreas K. Huettel > wrote: > > During the last Gentoo council meeting, the decision was made to implement > > changes to the gentoo-dev mailing list [1]. > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 08∶48 +0300, użytkownik Eray Aslan napisał: > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:20:56PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers and > > whitelisted additional participants. > > This is so contrary to what I