On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
You could be looking at someone trying to compromise your system through a
buffer overflow or similar vulnerability. If you enable automatic respawn
then congratulations, you just gave the attacker unlimited
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 10:31:21PM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote
The overhead of the files' presence is trivial, and most users won't
care. Those who do care have a trivial line to add in make.conf, and
that is for the
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
We should probably consider extending the INSTALL_MASK a bit. A good
idea would be to allow repositories to pre-define names
for INSTALL_MASK (alike USE flags) and allow portage to control them
over those names.
We'd need
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:45 AM, Ralph Sennhauser s...@gentoo.org wrote:
The other thing is those unit files really should come from upstream
and other distributions urge their developers to work with upstream [1]
Therefore I'd require an upstream bug for each unit that we add.
Makes sense,
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Ralph Sennhauser s...@gentoo.org wrote:
Adopting a package to distribution specifics is perfectly valid. But
here it's about adding functionality to a package that wasn't there
before. The usual reaction in such situations is to tell users to bug
upstream
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2].
No objections to mirroring it there, and accepting pull requests
there. However, would an outright move be contrary to our social
contract?:
However, Gentoo will
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very
sad to witness this once again.
I have mixed feelings for this very reason. The concept of accepting
contributions on github is an EXCELLENT one.
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Taahir Ahmed ahme...@tamu.edu wrote:
It should be noted that the first position (that the dependencies specified in
the ebuilds are not sufficient) is the position of cave's developers. I tend
to agree -- How is cave to know that there hasn't been a brekaing
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 3:18 PM, sascha...@babbelbox.org wrote:
- It supports Merge Requests, which are almost the same as PRs on Github,
which allows user contributions to be reviewed quite easily.
So, out of curiosity I set this up on a VM and started playing with it.
It seemed like the
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
Gerrit also requires letting the public push, but those pushes go
to a contained area and each commit is isolated.
Hm, how do you mean isolated?
Gerrit introduces the convention to create a unique
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:44 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
If we are going to take this stance, should we consider removing all
packages from the tree that have their upstream on github?
Considering that we allow even outright proprietary software in
portage which isn't
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Fabio Erculiani lx...@gentoo.org wrote:
And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is
to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind
ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users,
unless the eudev
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:10:03 +0200
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
- those not using the latest glibc (and maybe uclibc)
Did you test this? Are there more specific details regarding this?
Which version don't work?
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 13:25:11 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
In any case, there really isn't any decision to make here.
Then for what purpose is this discussion still going on?
No comment on that...
Maybe
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:18 PM, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
Question... when Sun made OpenOffice depend on Java (also a Sun
product) did Gentoo developers run around suggesting that Java be made a
part of the core Gentoo base system? I don't think so. If a user wants
to run GNOME badly
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Andreas K. Huettel
dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote:
The decision was made long ago. Use flags are not the correct way to control
solely the installation of a few small files.
This was really the heart of the discussion where the decision was made before.
USE flags
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is missing a reference URL or at least the ML thread subject; last
time I asked, I didn't got either and wasn't able to find this in a
reasonable amount of time. I find some irrelevant policy discussions
but nothing
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Daniel Campbell dlcampb...@gmx.com wrote:
something truly astonishing
Well, I have to at least thank you for turning this from just a
typical Gentoo flame-war into a breeding ground for LWN Quote of the
Week candidates.
Rich
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:22 AM, viv...@gmail.com viv...@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/21/13 23:38, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
Am Dienstag, 21. Mai 2013, 15:38:44 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
And if a maintainer is not responding within 30 days, you can ping him
or, without a response, try to get a
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
The amount of users misusing a knife or hammer is much lower than the
amount of users misusing INSTALL_MASK.
Agreed. A typical user would almost never need to use INSTALL_MASK.
If they're using it, they're probably doing
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
Are the sources for the auto-stable etc. script posted somewhere? I
don't think i've actually seen a URL at all in this thread (or the one
from a couple of months ago)..
By all means publish your script when done. That
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 00:14:36 +0800
Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
But if a co-maintainer pushes through a change that I oppose, then
working together becomes quite difficult. In this case I opted to give
up
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Anthony G. Basile bluen...@gentoo.org wrote:
We are moving too quickly on bug #448882 ([Tracker] packages not providing
systemd units). We should come to better consensus on systemd integration
and we were getting there with the idea of INSTALL_MASK. I don't
On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
Rich Freeman schrieb:
Yet another stand. No offense but I'm afraid it's quite childish of you.
I don't understand why you're so proud of it. It's a bit like 'Gentoo
will play as I like. If it doesn't
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 26 May 2013 15:37, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Considering the design of OpenRC itself, it wouldn't be *that hard*.
Actually, a method similar to one used in oldnet would simply work.
That is, symlinking
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 15:23:44 +0800
Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
Where is this policy documented?
Nowhere, I think. I've seen it coming in the late thread, looked common
sense enough to me.
If it is to be
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:01 AM, Robert David
robert.david.pub...@gmail.com wrote:
Newer say that wrapper will grow openrc size, and also dont know why it
would be bad. The point is somewhere else. I really dont know how many
user will switch inits and how many of them will do this regularly.
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 12:12:49 +0200
Robert David robert.david.pub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 05:49:48 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Init.d scripts are just shell scripts. All somebody needs
On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sun, 26 May 2013 15:15:26 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Cc: tom...@gentoo.org
Please don't CC me, this causes duplicate mails; one of both does not
include reply-to. Nobody else that has responded to me
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 7:01 PM, David Carlos Manuelda
stormb...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, thinking it better I agree, that having them use system libraries is far
better, but why then those affected ebuilds have corresponding USE disabled by
default?
Probably because the use of those system
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 8:37 PM, Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 12:35:29AM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote
- eselect init will be opt-in ***FOR THE TIME BEING***, people can
be left on their own tools if the want it
This statement should bring the same reaction
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is for a ABI change without bumping the soname? It's possible to
trigger rebuilds for that case by using sub-slots and slot-operators.
Or you could choose a longer-term solution like firebombing the
upstream
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Andreas K. Huettel
dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Ah btw how's that git migration coming along?
Even though we're drifting here an update is probably due.
At this point I'd say we have pretty high confidence that we can
accurately migrate the tree. The issues
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name
wrote:
And, moreover, I guess, SRC_URI can even be used for VCS:
SRC_URI=
git+ssh://github.com/lol/moo.git
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
It's just not going to happen as long as I got CVS access, it's not a threat
or a grandstanding, it's a simple boolean logic statement.
That IS grandstanding. I'm not saying I disagree with the position
you
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote:
The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on
layman which many of the devs would be opposed to. But, there is an open
bug calling for it to be merged with portage...
Honestly, native support for
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/15/2013 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote:
The other thing is that would put a mandatory system requirement on
layman which many of the devs would
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 3:15 PM, g...@malth.us wrote:
Am I the only one who feels that trolling, abuse, and so forth, are largely
in the eye of the beholder, and that lively, impassioned, constructive
debate may seem to many readers like hyperbole and ad hominem attack?
Hence my comment that
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Michael Weber x...@gentoo.org wrote:
And it's not fair to pick on the candidates by putting them under
close watch (mentor ship, probation already in place) and let the
established ones walk away.
Tend to agree, and I don't think it is as productive either.
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Michael Weber x...@gentoo.org wrote:
Bottom line: I think we need more of a culture of mutual trust than a
ton of metadata.
I have to agree with this. The culture should be that we're doing
this work FOR GENTOO. Sure, we're getting benefits out of it as well
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Shouldn't this be REQUIRES_TEAM instead? A herd used to be a
collection of packages, whereas the devs maintaining them were called
a team. Or don't we care about this distinction any more?
Certainly when I was recruited
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Semantic-desktop: Just so you guys know, as I said, I need semantic-
desktop about as much as I need another hole in my head, so I'm **VERY**
not happy with the 4.11 changes...
I believe this was announced - the reason the
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Michael Weber x...@gentoo.org wrote:
=== kexec ===
speaking of panic. I've never actually used it, but newer kernels
support kexec and in conjunction with pre-loaded panic-images[1] and
corresponding (compiled-in) initramfs, it'd be possible to have an
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
And unlike IRC meetings, you can cannot multitask, say making your dinner
while discussing this or that feature.
Honestly, that bit is a two-edged sword. I was just musing with the
Trustees yesterday how it seems
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org wrote:
These are all good reasons to not use Hangouts. Fortunately, there was
nothing in the proposal to suggest that it will be required for anyone, or
that it will replace any existing source of information. Therefore
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Egg Plant egg.pl...@rocketmail.com wrote:
The resourcefull developers/users can meet each other at Gentoo Miniconf and
similar other gatherings in real world. That will make us more human.
I don't think this is really sufficient. As far as I can tell most
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote:
Unfortunately, this means that I sometimes get credit for posting
such comments. Please make note of the ebuild/diff replacement and
attribute the changes correctly to the submitter, not the messenger. I
shouldn't be
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
And? Two wrongs don't make a right.
And I've said the same for any other proposed category like that.
I agree that precedence alone isn't really a good basis for this. I
don't really have concerns with the
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
On 14/07/2013 18:26, Peter Stuge wrote:
I don't think anyone can dispute that there exists a genre called
adventure games..
How comes scummvm is not in the list then? Just saying.
Seriously, a category for 10
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Matt Turner wrote:
And? Two wrongs don't make a right.
What do you mean by And? - it doesn't make much sense as a reply. :\
He means that none of those provide justification.
It seemed that the main argument was that
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:22 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
I am maintaining it for some months now and it has reached a state
where we should think about treecleaning it.
++
Maintaining a package in gentoo implies a few things for me:
We are able to support it properly which
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 1:55 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
But people should expect that things work somehow in the tree, even on
~arch. Even worse: the stable googleearth builds are unfetchable and
that's not how I'd define any stable ebuild in the tree.
You'll get no argument from
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Dnia 2013-07-22, o godz. 00:16:31
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
- users have to run layman -a foo ...I hope they will manage (and the
masking reason will be updated to explain where to look for googleearth
On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Roy Bamford neddyseag...@gentoo.org wrote:
- vote for holding meetings every 2nd Tuesday of the month at 2000
UTC
(or
1900 UTC depending on daylight savings)
In any timezone in particular?
Don't care much, but agree we should pick one.
The open floor is
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
The council really doesn't have the ability to just instantly vote on
things outside of a meeting. The transparency of the body requires
announcements about meetings, and their topics, with a reasonable amount
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Alex Xu alex_y...@yahoo.ca wrote:
As has been stated, this implies that Gentoo QA has tested the packages
and found them to be reasonably safe for use.
++
Stable should mean something, and those who understand the tradeoffs
can accept unstable packages where
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
Stable should mean something
For users, stable means older in practice. Always did, always will.
If you don't like stable, then don't run stable. Don't change the
meaning of stable, however, for those who
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Ben Kohler wrote:
I am suggesting that the latest available upstream kernel should
perhaps be the default for Gentoo users.
You seem to be ignoring the regressions that often come with new kernel
releases, the very common
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Greg KH gre...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 04:40:38PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
It just seems like we should be able to get by without a semiweekly
kernel upgrade on our stable branch.
You want me to slow down and do releases in larger chunks
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Fabio Erculiani lx...@gentoo.org wrote:
Some time ago I was also thinking about writing a test framework for
testing live images through kvm.
Of course I didn't manage to find time to try to arrange something in
the end, but the idea is still popping up in my
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:56 AM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
Mike Pagano schrieb:
Team members working alongside upstream (and downstream) developer Greg k-h
have decided to no longer request stabilization of the vanilla sources
kernel.
How about dropping
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
Grepping in the tree, looks like only some old genkernel versions are
depending on it. Apart of that, what is requiring static libs in
cryptsetup and lvm2?
This isn't the specific answer you're likely looking for, but the
I figure this is half-on-topic for this list since I'm trying to
prepare patch sets for a package. I'm getting fairly bizarre behavior
from git format-patch - patches that don't apply, and patches numbered
early in sequence that didn't show up previously in this branch. I
suspect rebasing might
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Dustin C. Hatch admiraln...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the point is that users may have an initramfs (that they built
manually or using some tool besides dracut or genkernel) that makes use of
cryptsetup/lvm2 built statically, or perhaps they just like it that
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Final output is:
can't find file to patch at input line 17
(messing with -p
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch linear?
If it contains merge commits, then git format-patch / git am isn't
guaranteed to work.
There are branches. There is obviously /A/ linear path from the
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 22:27:31 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org
wrote:
Is the history from the v0.26.0 tag to the tip of the branch
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 4:40 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Thomas Kahle posted on Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:58:58 -0600 as excerpted:
3. Conveying Modified Versions.
You may modify the Program for your private use only. You may not
convey, in any manner, a modified version of the Program
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:40 AM, viv...@gmail.com viv...@gmail.com wrote:
does storage space make everyone happy?
rich0 is confused and looks over at the storage space he keeps his
bicycles in...
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:03 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 07:42:26PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
As both a member of base-system, and the lvm2 maintainer, I'm going to
go and look at fixing them, because I'd prefer to keep them available as
static
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:38 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
If we want to continue supporting this, it will probably require custom
patches to udev, and kmod. Then we will have to make sure none of that
breaks systemd.
Seems like the simpler solution is to just have a dep on
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 17:17:35
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On 01/08/13 17:04, William Hubbs wrote:
There is a hack in our udev and kmod ebuilds that makes it possible to
build the static libraries,
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Steven J. Long
sl...@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk wrote:
It's funny how you always discuss those two options and consistently fail to
mention
the one option that allows people who never needed an initramfs before to
continue
without one, and still use udev in line
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Aug 3, 2013 10:06 AM, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 15:36 Fri 02 Aug , William Hubbs wrote:
I do not know of any breakage personally. It does work on my system, and
I know of others who are
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Ok all, I would like to appologise for the harsh wording.
Your wording wasn't harsh - it just wasn't ideal. If only imperfect
marketing was our worst problem around here...
Rich
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 4 August 2013 09:56, Alex Xu alex_y...@yahoo.ca wrote:
Minor grammar/typographical errata:
On 04/08/13 12:53 AM, Mike Pagano wrote:
kernel, we recommend user add 'sys-kernel/vanilla-sources' to their
s/user
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 03 Aug 2013 16:19:16 +0200
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
I find it a bit silly to require discussing global useflags on dev-ML.
The purpose of the discussion is to come up with a description that is general
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org wrote:
Even though the subslot is implicit, is that any reason to still use the
operator? We don't know what the maintainer's future intentions for the
subslot will be.
For example, we caused many useless rebuilds with
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:10:46 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
We can simply have multiple virtual versions, each depending
on the proper jpeg jpeg-turbo versions.
you can do it that way, yes.
what will
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
okay, maybe this plan sucks as some have suggested in later posts in this
thread.
however the main point from first post stands, don't at least do
virtual/jpeg:= deps, use at least virtual/jpeg:0 or virtual/jpeg:0=
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 10:28:59 -0500
William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
Markos, to answer your question, there are folks on the team, and at
least one user, using OpenRc from git without issues, so as far as I
know there
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Alexis Ballier aball...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 11:04:28 +0200
Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's fine, bug wranglers are doing a great job there.
However, I'm also sick of getting bugmail because $RANDOM_DEV thinks
* TRACKER is
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 7/08/2013 22:41, hasufell wrote:
You are a bug wrangler and should have the
authority to mess with anything in bugzilla.
Don't forget that anybody can start a project, even if it conflicts with
other projects.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's at the maintainer's decision to go ahead or not; there's nobody
going to stop the maintainer from adding it to ~. But there are people
that going to complain (users), take action (QA), ... when hell does
break loose
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev
tetrom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Alexis was talking about KEYWORDREQ, not STABLEREQ. When asking to readd
a keyword, you almost always want that keyword for whatever is the
highest version in a specific slot, even if that version has been in the
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
Possibly, but it be just another experiment waiting in a slowly
progressing queue; the one the CVS -- Git move is in. We have to be
fair, while experiments are neat and all that; they have hardly became
successful lately,
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
While people can scream, complaint and rant all they want about choice;
it isn't going to happen if nobody is going to implement it, until that
happens following whatever upstream does is the only reasonable thing
to do. Or
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Manuel Rüger mr...@gentoo.org wrote:
nothing of the taks you've listed enables you to proceed as you're
doing right now without an existing (i.e. written down) policy.
I think this is the main concern being voiced here.
Jer - can you perhaps consolidate your
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 14:43:12 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
If necessary the council can bless it, but I suspect
that most will see the logic of your arguments, and perhaps together
we'll even improve
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 5:43 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 11:29:06 +0200
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
Leave it in ~arch forever, because it is incompatible with system
packages. (virtual/service-manager)
But compatible with
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 5:45 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/08/2013 08:21 AM, Duncan wrote:
None-the-less, I do understand the problem of a gentoo project supporting
an option no devs on the project are actually interested in running.
I do not. If that is the policy, then the
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 10:56 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
Gentoo supports systemd, fine. Still, OpenRC is our default
implementation and I don't think something should be called stable _on
gentoo_ that doesn't work with the system tools we have designed and
advertise.
If a package
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
It may be pertinent for this reason (a smoother upgrade path) and
this reason alone, to stabilize gnome-3.6 first -- just to get into
gnome3 (and get gnome-2 removed) without having to also deal with the
systemd migration
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 18:36:24 +0200
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/08/2013 05:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
OpenRC is just one init system that Gentoo supports. Gentoo does
not require the use of OpenRC any more
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Martin Vaeth
va...@mathematik.uni-wuerzburg.de wrote:
Sorry for reposting: Somehow the first line got lost
making the whole posting not understandable...
Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote:
answer is about 10 additional megs of ram at idle
and
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 12:52 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/08/2013 06:48 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El jue, 08-08-2013 a las 18:36 +0200, hasufell escribió:
[...]
I am only talking about stabilization here, maybe that wasn't clear enough?
The virtual is in @system and the default
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Stability is about the quality of the ebuilds and the user
experience in general. It is not a statement that all Gentoo
developers think
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Alon Bar-Lev alo...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is called a 'profile'.
You can have systemd and openrc profiles, and then able to mask
specific packages...
It is a technical solution, but won't make lives much easier in this regard.
++
I don't think that this is
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/08/2013 05:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
It's not a regression; actually, it's quite common to drop features
that can no longer be supported. I don't see us blocking stabilization
for other cases in the Portage tree
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design choice.
We are not just talking about random ebuild
201 - 300 of 2142 matches
Mail list logo
