On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:56 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017 17:47:45 -0500
> Gordon Pettey wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Michał Górny
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On pon, 2017-07-10 at 17:40 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>> > > Stop getting lost in the weeds!!
t because they
need lots of new software, or need to customize things in ways that
are hard to do on other distributions. These people tend to realize
that even if they run stable, those stable packages would probably be
considered unstable on another distribution.
R0b0t1.
[1] Personally I do
, 2017 at 8:44 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>
> Not to get away from OP's question, but how good would the installer
> need to be before it held the interest of any developers that manage
> the website or handbook?
>
> I ask because the much simpler thing I suggested - fleshing out the
>
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:49 PM, RB wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> app-admin/integrit
>> app-forensics/afflib [o]
>> app-forensics/air
>> app-forensics/autopsy
>> app-forensics/chkrootkit [o]
>> app-forensics/cmospwd
>> app-forensics/examiner
>> app-forensics/g
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera
(klondike) wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'd like to get this one up by Saturday so that we can proceed with
> masking and removing of the hardened-sources after upstream stopped
> releasing new patches.
Where was this decision discussed? The la
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera
(klondike) wrote:
> El 15/08/17 a las 17:50, R0b0t1 escribió:
>> Where was this decision discussed?
> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-hardened/message/62ebc2e26d91e8f079197c2c83788cff
>
> And many other thread
n portage. Why not remove it first?
I had a similar issue with the GCC developer who removed GCJ support.
I asked him for any justification at all for the removal and he had
none but some vague statements about it creating work. I would have
taken any more specific example he gave at face value, but he didn't
want to give one. I was left to conclude he didn't have one to give.
So I ask again: On what basis are the hardened sources being removed
from the tree?
At this point I am far less interested in making sure the sources stay
in the tree than I am in forcing you to justify your actions, because
I suspect your attempt to do so will be entertaining.
R0b0t1.
On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 12:39 AM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera
> (klondike) wrote:
>> El 19/08/17 a las 13:18, Aaron W. Swenson escribió:
>>> On 2017-08-19 13:01, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) wrote:
>>
s experienced as some). However this
would be my first time working with portage at such a level.
I apologize if my post is too forward for this list.
Regards,
R0b0t1
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> R0b0t1 posted on Tue, 22 Aug 2017 21:46:09 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 3:50 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>> Some time ago I've made an effort to split ejabberd into proper
&
eady be quite arbitrary. Having nested package namespaces
might make things better because then you are forced to define the
logical relationships between namespaces in a way that is not open to
as much interpretation.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
sing it is to use.
>From this definition, I see no connection to anything graphical. To
the extent that words have meaning I think the selection of "ux-*"
would be a mistake.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
mostly irrelevant as long as it has a Power
CPU, but they would be nice to know.
The use for the machine would be to experiment with the novel
architecture while maintaining it with Gentoo, which would likely
spill over into providing support for Gentoo on IBM Power.
I will try to catch you on IRC, but hopefully you receive this message as well.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 10:18 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Brendan Horan wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I have some hardware I would like to see go to a good home.
>> I would prefer it to be someone working with Gentoo.
>> That was my goal, bu
On Wednesday, September 6, 2017, Brendan Horan wrote:
> Hi R0b0t1,
>
> Sounds good to me.
> Shipping a 30kg+ system by it self will not be cheep.
> This is originally why I had the idea to ship all the systems together.
>
I thought so. Shipping will still be cheaper than a used
On Wednesday, September 6, 2017, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 6, 2017, Brendan Horan wrote:
>> Hi R0b0t1,
>>
>> Sounds good to me.
>> Shipping a 30kg+ system by it self will not be cheep.
>> This is originally why I had the idea to ship all the syst
s? Users might do those things, and Gentoo might
be liable for the consequences if they do.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Do you really need me to put it on the Council agenda?
Sir, please see my above comment about building ballistic missiles. It
may be important for the Gentoo Foundation to add a disclaimer similar
to the one I mentioned. I would hate for the Foundation or any of its
administrators or contributors to be found guilty of aiding and
abetting terrorists.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Friday, September 8, 2017, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 7 Sep 2017, R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> Downloading does not imply committing a felony. As far as anyone can
>> tell it is impossible to prosecute someone for downloading something
>> they alrea
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Complex build system, hard to maintain, no dependencies in tree, upstream
> does not cooperate (Bug#630420).
> Removal in 30 days.
>
I don't have any reason to disagree with this but I expected a
citation for those things to be in the bug you
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:11:51 -0500
> R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> Then I'm quite confused as to why people seem to be extremely attentive to
>> copyright infringement (besides an immediate payout). In the US they cite
>
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 8:33 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:11:51 -0500
>> R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>>> Then I'm quite confused as to why people seem to be extremely attentive to
>>> copyrig
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On 8 September 2017 at 22:44, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>> > Complex build system, hard to maintain, no dependencies in tree, upstream
>> > does not cooperate
ill lots of things that are harder than
they should be.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 3:58 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 20:33:49 -0500
> R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> In any case it is my understanding that the issue is that simple. It's
>> the reason torrents and magnet links exist, and why there are no legal
>> claims
Hello!
On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Dean Stephens wrote:
> On 09/09/17 12:23, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> On Saturday, September 9, 2017, Johnson Steward wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I've been messing with Gentoo FreeBSD these days and, finally, got to the
>> current lat
with no negatives.
Please refer to a statement by a project contributor and the original
author: https://github.com/gollum/gollum/issues/712.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
y use CentOS.
I am trying to fix bugs as best as I am able but it is starting to
look hopeless.
Excess resources on the donated OSU OpenPOWER machine could be offered
to other developers or used to run a Tinderbox. It may be a good idea
to do those things on the already existing machine(s).
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:29 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (This will be almost a duplicate on the PPC list, but now having more
> information I am sending it to the BSD list as well.)
>
> I apologize in advance if I did anything improper. I misunderstood
> desultory when I
his is the basis I used to request shipping
reimbursement for a donated POWER6+ server.
The tracker has some bugs I have submitted and others I have commented
on (I would link to them but I haven't figured out how to find all
bugs by me, or all bugs that I have commented on). There are people
who would recognize my name but as I said before, now a line has been
crossed. I do not want to make anyone feel like I am cornering them.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
Hello,
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu pon, 11.09.2017 o godzinie 21∶59 -0500, użytkownik R0b0t1
> napisał:
>> Hello friends,
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > W dniu pon, 11.09.2017 o godzini
andbox.
In some cases that can make sense, I suppose. I am not a very smart
man, so I would not know the necessary burden of proof.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 09/22/2017 05:51 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Sandbox
>>>
>>
>> I think I understand, in principle, why
on quite credible. If the
time taken to generate the hashes is a legitimate concern then using a
older, simpler, and heavily optimized function may be better for one
of the choices.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
o run more
slowly over the same amount of data than their counterparts with
smaller block sizes.
If speed truly is crucial then it may be a better idea to use one very
strong hash function and two weaker but faster hash functions. This is
why I recommended RIPEMD160. If BLAKE2B is used, it may be possible to
switch SHA512 for SHA256.
It seems important to me to use three hash functions.
Again, though, I think it needs to be pointed out that on slower
machines the hash time is on the order of tens of seconds. This should
be negligible compared to the build time.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
ne given they are based on separate constructs.
>
> But IMHO we should start where things matter and complete an
> implementation for OpenPGP signatures of MetaManifests in Portage.
>
This is why I use webrsync-gpg. Git commits are supposed to be
GPG-signed, so that may be suitable for your purposes.
Cheers,
R0b0t1.
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 05:21:47PM -0500, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> I would like to present my suggestions:
>>
>> SHA512, (RIPEMD160 | WHIRLPOOL | BLAKE2B), (SHA3_512 | BLAKE2B);
>>
>> or more definitively:
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:12 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 05:21:47PM -0500, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>> I would like to present my suggestions:
>>>
>>> SHA512, (RIPEMD160 | WHIRLPOOL | BLAKE2
SHA3 or BLAKE2B shall be
> enabled in an upcoming minor Portage release (soon)
> - 18 months after the next GLEP is approved, SHA512 shall be dropped
> (put the date into the Portage code so it happens automatically this
> time, unlike SHA256 that should have been removed in 2010!).
>
This makes sense, but I would hope deprecation can be justified in a useful way.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Hanno Böck posted on Sat, 21 Oct 2017 19:50:11 +0200 as excerpted:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:12:44 -0500 R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>>> People are discussing collision resistance, but no one
My apologies, I forgot to address something:
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Hanno Böck wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 12:12:44 -0500
> R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> That is precisely why I didn't suggest it be used on its own (see note
>> about extant use of MD5), and why I g
Hello,
On Wednesday, November 8, 2017, Jonas Stein wrote:
> Hi "R0b0t1",
>
>>>> For the record, I'd claim I am.
>
> The question
>> On what basis?
> is ok, but
>
>> I performed a search on your name, and found at least
>> one person
;
> 2018-02-14 (T+3m):
>
> - manifest-required-hashes = BLAKE2B
>
> 2018-05-14 (T+6m):
>
> - last rite fetch-restricted packages that do not use BLAKE2B.
>
> The final removal of SHA512 will be decided by the Council separately.
>
Does the existence of a decision mean I would need to contact the trustees
if I feel the changes have not been adequately justified?
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
ressed reflects poorly on those who
sought disciplinary action.
However, I am not a very smart man. I am usually wrong. Hopefully
someone who is much more intelligent than I can explain how I have
erred in my opinion.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1.
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:30 AM, William L. Thomson Jr.
wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:38:09 -0600
> R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>> Hopefully this is not a tangent, but the OpenJDK release is available
>> on Ubuntu. I have tried to understand the IcedTea build process and
>>
ist. Please do
not ban me, friends. I am not very smart, and using my computer is
hard without help.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
bootstrap scripts are poorly explained with no extant documentation
and a workflow that does not clearly fit into Gentoo (or more properly
Portage) development at large. Other ebuilds may simply install low
quality software, or install software that is hard to manage with
Portage.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
Hello friends!
On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Benda Xu wrote:
> Greetings R0b0t1,
>
> R0b0t1 writes:
>
>> It is one thing to say that contributions to the main Portage tree
>> require some standards to be upheld, but these standards do not seem
>> to be app
Hello friends!
On Monday, November 20, 2017, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2017 22:47:35 -0600
> R0b0t1 wrote:
>
>> Understanding an existing codebase should not be a technical
>> challenge. I had to resort to reimplementing all of the steps myself,
>> in
On Monday, November 20, 2017, Amy Liffey wrote:
> dev-lang/clojure
I have some interest in helping with clojure. I have interacted with the
proxy maintainers before - do I need to wait for it to break?
Cheers,
R0b0t1
r updates).
>
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 12:57:49PM -0600, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> These posts are concerning because it looks like someone became stir
>> crazy and invented a problem to solve. The changes proposed to date
>> have remained poorly justified, and no one has addressed the co
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 9:00 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> Hello friends!
>
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> Replying to your original question here, to repeat the answer I emphasised
>> before, along with significantly more detail in the history of Port
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 10:19 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 7:15 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> What I wanted to avoid was something I encountered on the GCC mailing
>> list: When I asked why GCJ was removed, I was told that it was hard to
>> maintain. When I as
a hard time imagining how it would be an
inflexible requirement to use a space in a filename, but it could come
up if it was necessary to use Portage on a non-Gentoo distribution.
It seems very arbitrary. I think the better solution is to use a better parser.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:02 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu wto, 21.11.2017 o godzinie 20∶59 -0600, użytkownik R0b0t1
> napisał:
>> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > W dniu czw, 16.11.2017 o godzinie 11∶19 +0100, użytkownik Michał Górny
&g
nt
> problem, just a clear split between 'developers' and 'non-developers'.
>
> в. 'Expert users' are still provided with a mailing list where they can
> discuss Gentoo without being pushed down into 'user support' channels.
>
> г. Active contributors (in particular recruits) can still obtain posting
> access to the mailing lists, much like they do obtain it to #gentoo-dev
> right now. However, if they start misbehaving we can just remove that
> without the risk of evasion.
>
I feel this is still a fairly large barrier to involvement. Getting
people to the point they want to contribute or have the knowledge to
contribute is the hard part, and what this will make harder to do.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
19:09 @floppym | wltjr really seems to make shit up when he
doen't know what he's talking about.
19:20@mgorny | lol
19:20@mgorny | we're talking about the real wltjr or the
r0b0t1 fake identity?
19:21 @floppym | mgorny: There's a fake?
19:22
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu sob, 02.12.2017 o godzinie 19∶33 -0600, użytkownik R0b0t1
> napisał:
>> Hello,
>>
>> In every mailing list conversation, there are at least three people:
>> the two conversing, and the future reader. I p
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 8:56 PM, kuzetsa wrote:
>
> Yes please. I don't want to see gentoo end because of ... rudeness.
>
Be careful, it is easy to disguise rudeness as tact.
hange, I'll be one of the people to quit.
> 3) gentoo already has documented instances of people leaving.
>
Yes, and from the other end, I see lots of people who hate red tape
and a fear of confrontation that gets in the way of technical
discussion. As far as I can tell, most of the people who feel slighted
feel that way because they choose to interpret someone asking about
the validity of their actions as a personal insult.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
en, only in the first circuit.
I'm still waiting for the notice that I can't use Gentoo to
manufacture weapons of mass destruction.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu nie, 03.12.2017 o godzinie 23∶59 -0600, użytkownik R0b0t1
> napisał:
>> As noted, there is one: analyzing the actions of those who are being
>> "attacked" to see why people are bothering to do it in the
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:04 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:22 AM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> And what would you do when somebody repeatedly sexually harasses other
>>> members of the comm
appear to be developers who have editorial control of
packages they do not understand. It also seems like they have ample
opportunity to confer with people who do understand the packages but
choose not to do so.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
lace.
Not So Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Georg Rudoy <0xd34df...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-12-08 2:43 GMT-05:00 R0b0t1 :
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
>> wrote:
>> > On 12/04/2017 10:36 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>> >>
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:57 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Georg Rudoy <0xd34df...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2017-12-08 2:43 GMT-05:00 R0b0t1 :
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
>>> wrote:
>>> >
opriate. FYI,
> just let me correct a few facts here:
>
> 1. ComRel made its decision long before the discussion was even started
> (and I was unaware of it as well), and -- unless you presume they have
> time travellers there -- had nothing to do with it.
>
> 2. I disagree with the way of announcing the ban as well. I had nothing
> to do with that.
>
> 3. The agenda item wasn't expressing 'feelings of one developer', as you
> know it. It was written by me because I found the time to prepare
> a rationale of *facts* to support it. Don't shoot the messenger.
>
Most of what you provided were baseless assertions. I gave you ample
opportunity to explain why the actions would be taking place, but you
refused to provide any facts.
> 4. Finally, if you really hate me so much, you could at least bother to
> check the facts instead of publicly insulting me based purely on lies.
>
What facts?
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
t...
>
I would like to know. But on the other hand, anyone interested in
contributing to packages they work with is likely already doing so. On
the third (and final?) hand, it may also be that there are people
looking for direction.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
ed can be extremely hard to replicate and
lead to sporadic errors.
In response to the concerns about stability: If I run a lot of unstable
packages, would that preclude my system from being able to help?
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> On 2017-12-14 21:06, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> In response to the concerns about stability: If I run a lot of unstable
>> packages, would that preclude my system from being able to help?
>
> Yes. Only clean stable systems
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 12/14/2017 09:21 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> It seems like lagging stability is due to a lack of resources. I do
>> not know a single person who would be able to run only stable
>> packages.
>
> I run stable
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 4:04 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand
> wrote:
>> On 12/14/2017 09:21 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>> It seems like lagging stability is due to a lack of resources. I do
>>> not know a single person who wo
On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 7:25 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 15/12/17 01:17, R0b0t1 wrote (excerpted):
>> I'm not trying to be confrontational, but asserting an opinion is
>> correct without explaining why that it is so isn't really conducive to
>> arriving at the tru
an immediate response is necessary?
self-evident
adj. Evident to one’s self and to nobody else.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 12/17/17 19:39, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Hello, everyone.
>>>
>>> It's my pleasure to announce that with a majority vote the QA team has
>>> accepted a new policy. The accepted wordin
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Elvis Pranskevichus wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 3:44:26 PM EST R0b0t1 wrote:
>> How easy is it to move patches to Gentoo infrastructure if the patches
>> are not provided by upstream? I am slightly uncomfortable with
>> every
ith purpose, then spending 30s to type out that purpose
should not be annoying.
> To answer you question: I think the RFC introduces either a "time pressure" or
> should be seen as sign that this list needs an improvement.
>
See reply to first paragraph; I mean specific events that make the OP
feel this is necessary.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
things
being proposed do not seem to be well justified.
If, like in the past, decisions will be enforced more or less
arbitrarily and opaquely, I can only see this causing more problems. I
suppose the problems may be quieter.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
seem completely arbitrary. There seems to be no extant problems
caused by the flag as set, so why focus on this specifically?
There is a lot of discussion of not burdening developers with
pointless talk or changes. If that is a goal, then why is this posting
receiving so many replies?
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Nils Freydank wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 27. Dezember 2017, 22:33:03 CET schrieb R0b0t1:
>> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 10:32 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> > As he said, he contactedd the maintainers in ample time, so I would say
>> > that since
systems, which is implied to be supported.by the + naming (again, not sure
if it matters).
Cheers,
R0b0t1
es not tell you anything
about their opinion.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
Hello, and my apologies for missing your message.
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:59 AM, Benda Xu wrote:
> Hi R0b0t1,
>
> R0b0t1 writes:
>
>> I don't want to just comment on naming, but:
>>
>> It might be more natural to go the other way. Split profiles off based
Erm.
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:23 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
> Hello, and my apologies for missing your message.
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:59 AM, Benda Xu wrote:
>> Hi R0b0t1,
>>
>> R0b0t1 writes:
>>
>>> I don't want to just comment on naming, but:
&
ack the new system and modify bootloader entries. All configuration
of the system apart from that would have to be handled upstream when
the release was prepared, or stored on the data partition.
This is done for lots of devices (phones?) and works well even when
bandwidth is fairly limited.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu czw, 25.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶37 +, użytkownik Robin H.
> Johnson napisał:
>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 01:35:17PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > Title: Portage rsync tree verification
>> > Author: Michał Górny
>> > Posted: 2018-01-
teract with the distfile server by hand, and would
appreciate it if the files can be maintained in some way that finding
them is obvious without tools.
Every once and a while I navigate to the distfile root and need to
forcefully exit Firefox.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 8:27 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu czw, 25.01.2018 o godzinie 15∶55 -0600, użytkownik R0b0t1
> napisał:
>> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > W dniu czw, 25.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶37 +, użytkownik Robin H.
>> >
.. [#ML1] [gentoo-dev] [pre-GLEP] Split distfile mirror directory
structure
>(
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/cfc4f8595df2edf9a25ba9ecae2463ba
)
>
> .. [#ADAPTIVE_FILENAME] Andrew Barchuk's reply on 'using character ranges
>for each directory computed in a way to have the files distributed
evenly'
>(
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/611bdaa76be049c1d650e8995748e7b8
)
>
> .. [#PKGNAME] Jason Zamal's reply including 'using the same dir layout
>as the packages themselves)
>(
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/f26ed870c3a6d4ecf69a821723642975
)
>
>
> Copyright
> =
> This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
3.0
> Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Michał Górny
>
It's going to be hash based? Why? I tried to follow the conversation but
there's now close to 5 of these posts in the mailing list with different
conversations in each.
Using filename prefixes is boring and not uniform, but I feel I should
point out that most distfile hosts are still doing fine. Microoptimizing
this seems like wasted effort.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
uot;tty"
changed to "uucp" for some reason?
If possible please use dialout, as very few modems are teletypes.
It makes the most sense to me to give a uucp user dialout or tty
permission, instead of adding myself to the uucp group, a name which
references programs most people won't have installed and won't know
about.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
gic you might be able to make
> the installed packages compatible with pip, cargo, etc.
>
> I think its more of a struggle to make it compatible with things like
> virtualenv or pip --user though.
>
This might be a good way to relieve the amount of intervention
required when repackaging code for an actual package manager. The
information should be there. The other option is convincing people to
package for multiple systems at once, which diffuses the effort to the
point people tend to not mind.
1) Language package manager (usually used by Windows consumers).
2) .debs for Ubuntu/Debian.
3) .rpms for Fedora/CentOS.
4) Sometimes there's a Gentoo or Arch release.
If you could sell #4 as a way to generate 1-3 it would likely be
possible to reduce the proliferation of language specific package
managers over time. Prefix would likely play an important role.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:22 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Michael Orlitzky
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 3:55 PM, R0b0t1 wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>>>
>>> Because containers are awesome and are way easier to use.
>>>
>>
>> I think you misse
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> If you have util-linux installed then try running (as any user - you
> don't have to be root):
> unshare -i -m -n -p -u -C -f --mount-proc -U -r /bin/bash
>
Interesting. I hadn't found a good interface to containers and
clone(2) besides Dock
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:06 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM, Benda Xu wrote:
>> Rich Freeman writes:
>>
>>> If you have util-linux installed then try running (as any user - you
>>> don't have to be root): unshare -i -m -n -p -u -C -f --mount-proc -U
>>> -r /bin/bash
>>>
s from munging state,
because there is none. This is okay except when one needs state, which
one does for most desktop activities.
This implies it doesn't solve the problem. Working around it may be
valid, but only if state can be preserved.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
> The community has a 'toxic people problem'
Maybe certain people who feel they are being attacked are idiots and
don't like hearing it? I can't tell, and I suspect other people can't
either.
Respectfully,
R0b0t1
on may not be greeted amicably.
Overall, this makes it seem like the closure of the development list
is to keep decisions from being questioned. If there were hecklers
asking stupid questions that would be one thing, but that is not what
it looks like to me.
I will note most developers go quietly about
el.
Consequently, I would appreciate if the machinery can be left. If it
becomes a maintenance burden in the future I suspect that would be a
good time to remove it.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
it
for compressing the ebuilds is likely huge anyway.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
