On Tue, 2007-06-02 at 21:11 +, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:03:50 -0500
> Olivier Crete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What so wrong with bash?
>
> Unsuited to an init system that wants to work everywhere, like embedded
> systems.
>
> Als
On Tue, 2007-06-02 at 20:34 +, Roy Marples wrote:
> > Keeping it as is has the advantage that an
> > upgrade/downgrade cycle wouldn't change much in functionality based on
> > config, which is pretty good (ie, backwards compatibility). In this
> > case, I'm not sure legacy is all that bad, sim
On Tue, 2007-06-02 at 00:54 +0200, Mohammed Hagag wrote:
> Hi all, Today i discovered that *box ebuilds doesn't depend on x11 is
> this a common ? or should i submit a bug ?
>
> i'm tried to emerge blackbox fluxbox openbox and all of them didn't
> depend on x11.
They do not need an X server to ru
On Mon, 2007-29-01 at 14:01 -0600, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote: [Mon Jan 29 2007, 09:50:28AM CST]
> > > Then it should be offered to the 8th person, at which point either
> > > he/she will then refuse the nomination and it's offered to the 9th.
> > > Rinse and repeat.
> > > If we run out
On Tue, 2006-31-10 at 17:02 +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> This leaves package maintainers in the situation that there are
> 'old'/'insecure'/ versions of
> packages that are hanging around only because arches have fallen
> behind. Package maintainers want to be able to remove these old
> versions
On Mon, 2006-30-10 at 17:40 +0100, George Shapovalov wrote:
> понеділок, 30. жовтень 2006 17:16, Chris Gianelloni Ви написали:
> > allow valid devs, and maintainer-needed in maintainer.
> Should we also disallow adding new no-herd/maintainer-needed ebuilds?
> (As the apparent use of maintainer-ne
On Mon, 2006-30-10 at 08:26 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Alternate subject: On the sudden appearance of USE=X for tons of stuff
>
> I really want to use font.eclass in x-modular.eclass to get rid of a lot
> of code duplication and more possible bugs. Problem is, it brings in
> IUSE=X for every
On Mon, 2006-23-10 at 22:34 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Up till now, I relied on implicit dependencies (dependencies of my
> dependencies).
> Apparently now (see https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=152534) we
> should add every atom that an ebuild depends on to (R)DEPEND.
In the pkg-config cas
On Mon, 2006-18-09 at 20:00 +0100, Gustavo Felisberto wrote:
> Due to my work for the next two semesters being increased I'm going to have to
> drop my maintainer status for some of the packages I handle. I'll still keep a
> small number of packages that I really don't want to let go.
> Also, due t
On Fri, 2006-01-09 at 16:20 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 01 September 2006 15:18, Chris White wrote:
> > On Friday 01 September 2006 11:26, Greg KH wrote:
> > > No, we should just stop distributing the prebuild image in our release
> > > and live cds. We do not have to do anything with
On Mon, 2006-21-08 at 13:28 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 21 August 2006 10:29, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-21-08 at 12:21 +0100, Herbie Hopkins wrote:
> > > I've always viewed the emul libs as a temporary measure until we had full
> > > multilib fuctionality in portage. Afaik
On Thu, 2006-10-08 at 10:57 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Well, we don't yet have reliable software in place to _count_ votes,
> but that's no reason not to start collecting them. The polls are now
> open, and will remain so until UTC 20060911 (one month). To vote,
> log into dev.g.o and ty
On Wed, 2006-07-06 at 18:41 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Arek (James Potts) wrote:
> > Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> >>> >=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for
> >>> modular X.
>
> >> I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow
> >> unported ebuilds
On Tue, 2006-11-04 at 19:35 -0500, Daniel Goller wrote:
> > Isn't this why we already have the arch tester position as described by
> > GLEP 41 (http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0041.html)?
> > Furthermore, are you saying that users would enroll themselves via this
> > hypothetical web in
On Mon, 2006-10-04 at 18:25 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 10 April 2006 15:37, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> > In any event, I think we need to remove the flying saucer guy. When
> > drobbins left and turned over the Gentoo IP to us, one thing that he
> > kept was the flying saucer guy. I be
On Wed, 2006-22-03 at 15:16 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> There aren't really any remaining blockers to keep modular X out of
> ~arch, as far as I can see.
>
> If anyone's got one, please bring it up now. I'm planning to unmask
> later tonight.
If modular X is used and gnome-ba
On Thu, 2006-02-03 at 21:14 +0100, Lars Strojny wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 26.02.2006, 21:25 -0800 schrieb Donnie Berkholz:
> [...]
> > You might want to talk to the maintainer and herd, not all of us. Or
> > even file a bug for updates -- some people are very busy and just don't
> > notice there's a
On Mon, 2006-13-02 at 16:51 -0500, Forrest Voight wrote:
> What about env.d? Gnome could install and env file that by default
> sets XSESSION to gnome.
Can't do... you can have gnome, kde, xfce, etc all installed at the same
time.
> On 2/13/06, Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mo
On Tue, 2006-24-01 at 13:32 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Mark Loeser wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:06:12 -0800 Donnie Berkholz
> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> What's wrong with the original idea of just making any unported ebuild
> >>> pull in all of modular X (minus drivers)? Yes,
On Mon, 2006-23-01 at 11:21 -0600, Mike Doty wrote:
> I am currently working as a systems administrator for McGill University
> School of Computer Science, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I live with my
> girlfriend in an apartment in the east of Montreal.
Hey, I'm not longer the only one in Montreal! A
On Thu, 2006-19-01 at 17:56 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> - USE=debug *never* changes CFLAGS or LDFLAGS or what have you, it *only*
> enables additional runtime code (such as assert()'s or helpful debug
> output) ... if you're confused by what i mean, run `USE=debug emerge nano`
> and then run
On Tue, 2006-17-01 at 18:03 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 January 2006 17:51, Olivier Crete wrote:
> > The argument in favor of splitdebug is that it allows users to give
> > useful bugreports when using tools such as gnome's bug-buddy.
>
On Tue, 2006-17-01 at 08:11 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
> On 1/15/06, Olivier Crête <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why not use the splitdebug instead of nostrip? And make building with -g
> > the default, then tell small HD users how to disable it in the docs. And
> > it needs to disable -fomit-fram
On Sun, 2006-15-01 at 22:05 +, Tom Martin wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Two new developers to tell you about. First up is Martin Ehmsen, who is
> going to be helping out with the text-markup herd, i.e. tex ;).
Ah finally someone to fix all of my TeX problems...
--
Olivier Crête
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
G
On Fri, 2006-06-01 at 09:39 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:00 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> > > On 06/01/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 1) Manpower. There are already 10,000 open bu
On Mon, 2005-19-12 at 21:08 +0100, George Shapovalov wrote:
> Thanks, I'll try, but seeing gnome in the name I am quite skeptical. It's
> really nothing personal. Its just in my experience gnome/gtk apps could never
> handle cyrillic well enough in all situations..
>
> Yea, cyrillic is a bitch.
On Mon, 2005-19-12 at 12:19 +0100, George Shapovalov wrote:
> Ugh, it is the only one that reliably connects to icq (yea, I am stuck using
> it for many people whom I contact as this is pretty much the only protocol
> "honored" there) *and* handles various encodings in a sane way (no, gaim,
> wh
On Tue, 2005-13-12 at 21:09 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:53:45 -0500 Olivier Crete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | Why not just modify GlEP 1 ?
>
> Going back and retroactively modifying standards is icky, and it
> *still* doesn't address
On Tue, 2005-13-12 at 20:43 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 21:35:44 +0100 Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | I don't think that we need a GLEP for it, no matter how 'mini' it
> | would be.. Just asked Grant if I can convert dates in current GLEPs,
> | and he's ok wi
On Tue, 2005-06-12 at 17:04 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
> As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
I see nothing about GPG in the GLEP.. Would those manifest files be
signed like the current ones? Would it be possible to have "per-line"
si
On Mon, 2005-21-11 at 02:18 -0500, Curtis Napier wrote:
> I'm asking for everyone (developers and users alike) to please have a
> look at the updated site and send any feedback you may have. I'm
> especially interested in feedback from anyone who uses accessibilty
> programs such as screen reade
On Fri, 2005-18-11 at 22:06 +0100, Max wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On 11/18/05, Homer Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Thoughts, better ideas appreciated.
> >
> Well, they are called testers, so why not @testers.g.o?
I like @testers.g.o .. it feels like an army of mini-me !
Can I get [EMAI
On Tue, 2005-25-10 at 20:16 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 13:55:36 -0400 solar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Please do not put words in my mouth. I've already asserted to you
> | several times that the definition of RDEPEND= is unclear and that we
> | do infact need a new set
On Fri, 2005-16-09 at 16:21 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze wrote:[Fri Sep 16 2005, 04:11:14PM EDT]
> > > Those should be in package.mask. ~arch is for candidates for arch that
> > > haven't yet proven themselves.
> >
> > It's often the case that those ebuilds in principle work, but th
On Thu, 2005-15-09 at 16:51 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> > 3. glep40: Standardizing "arch" keywording across all archs
> >Vote asked by Grant Goodyear
>
> Approved.
What does that glep mean anyways ? Appart from the creation of the x86
team, is there any action to be taken?
- Is the maint key
On Mon, 2005-12-09 at 20:50 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 21:39:48 +0200 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | This has been in the todo-list for quite a while, but finally it's
> | done. I'm curious what you think of it.
>
> Could we get some numbers? How many arch
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 15:25 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> So would just making an x86 arch team. It would also be much less of a
> problem than merging x86 and amd64. How about this? I proclaim and x86
> arch team now exists. It already has a security liason.
>
> $ cat /var/mail/alias/arch/
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:53 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 20:46:46 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | On Thursday 01 September 2005 20:32, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > Ideally they wouldn't be keyworded at all.
> | I live in a real world, not an
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 19:02 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 19:50:11 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | On Thursday 01 September 2005 19:41, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > Untrue.
> |
> | Can I have reasoning?
>
> Take a look at how sparc and mips c
On Thu, 2005-01-09 at 07:09 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Thanks to the 148 people who voted. I think that's slightly less than a
> 50% turnout, but it's still not too shabby.
>
> The new Gentoo Council is:
>
> seemant
> vapier
> agriffis
> solar
> azarah
> Swift
> Koon
As your friendly elect
On Tue, 2005-30-08 at 21:56 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:45:24 -0400 Olivier Crete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | And I dont think the QA is worst on x86.. Most herd devs are on x86
> | and its their responsability to do their QA.
>
> QA needs
On Tue, 2005-30-08 at 21:40 +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 21:15:18 +
> Luis Medinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I belive the worse QA is in x86 and not in AMD64 and MIPS. Between
> > AMD64 and x86 there's a lot of differences i.e. many packages in the
> > tree that n
On Tue, 2005-30-08 at 10:46 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> >>Shouldn't this fall under the x86 arch team rather than releng? The
> >
> > I'm sorry, but *what* x86 arch team?
>
> That's the point. Ciaran is just pointing out for the gazillionth time
> that x86 is an unsupported arch, if you g
On Tue, 2005-23-08 at 21:27 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 8:52:13 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | On 21/8/2005 23:05:05, Ciaran McCreesh ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> | > Now the proposal. This isn't something that can happen immediately,
> | > but it's
On Tue, 2005-23-08 at 12:40 -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> First, sidenote (mild ot to this thread also), pardon the dupe posts,
> thick fingered typing dumping an old message :)
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 01:34:33PM -0400, Olivier Crete wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-23-08 at 11
On Tue, 2005-23-08 at 11:16 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> As an aside to this. Does anyone know how debug information can be changed
> to have a different basedir. My idea was to create a "custom" strip
> wrapper that would create external debugging files (like now possible
> with gdb/binutils)
On Fri, 2005-12-08 at 13:53 +0900, Chris White wrote:
> I really do agree with not only this, but the need for stable marking
> as well. Gentoo is very bleeding edge at this point, and I feel that
> stable packages are somewhat lacking. However, the problems I see is
> what is considered "Let the
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 10:32 -0500, Mike Doty wrote:
> Everyone welcome our newest minion: MetalGOD. Luis joins us to help out
> with the printing herd and amd64 keywording. He also has his eyes on
> the GDP project. I'll let him introduce himself.
Welcome among us ! And give us those amd64 keyw
On Wed, 2005-20-07 at 23:58 +0200, Christian Parpart wrote:
> community-libs/libyacs
> community-server/yacsd
> community-server/yacs-meta
> So, finally, in what category could those packages be placed in?
What about net-libs and net-misc ?
--
Olivier Crête
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Developer
x8
On Thu, 2005-30-06 at 15:09 -0500, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> On Thursday 30 June 2005 03:01 pm, Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote:
> > It seems that portage evaluates disjonction left to right and
> > stops on the first match it founds. Thus, if you want want it to
> > choose the best matching version,
On Tue, 2005-28-06 at 07:20 -0400, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 12:57:46PM +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> > On 6/28/05, Shyam Mani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The only difference I see b/w "Staff" and "Developers" is that you might
> > > not have access to CVS. You'll have a
On Thu, 2005-16-06 at 00:02 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> The problem with external libraries which are needed on non-glibc systems
> (not
> sure about uclibc) to have GNU-style functions is getting bigger.
>
> Not only we need to depend on gettext and libiconv, but there's now also
On Thu, 2005-09-06 at 10:40 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 09:35:26AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> >
> >>It would still be useful to keep the titles and other info, just
> >>removing the link
On Tue, 2005-07-06 at 17:44 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:[Tue Jun 07 2005, 05:32:31PM EDT]
> > I also vote for alpha. I would like to see some indication of
> > maintainer arch in metadata too, but in general agree with the
> > policy of if one arch stabilises then we can as
54 matches
Mail list logo
