RE: [gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release
Yeah, they should at least post on note on the gentoo.org to announce the delay.SalutalpSylvain> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 11:27:59 +0100> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Why no updates on delay of 2008.0 release> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-> Hash: SHA1> > I thought we had learnt something about not communicating with our userbase, but> it looks like this lesson has already been forgotten. While I appreciate there> probably are valid reasons for the delay of the beta and the release of 2008.0,> I don't think there is any excuse not to update the published release schedule,> nor for the utter lack of communication about this issue with our users. A short> message on the frontpage of www.gentoo.org with a new (even if tentative) ETA,> and some kind of explanation for the delay would certainly be much appreciated.> > Thanks,> > Ben> > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-> Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org> > iD8DBQFH5N8vi+u7I1rvkiYRAqGBAJ49SeDwGgvVpTdMCI8M1DZ5hncuBwCZAWXd> GsgP7gY2xuOARHmCcbbx6xU=> =W6u7> -END PGP SIGNATURE-> -- > gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list> _ This Valentine's Day, get creative and show your sweetheart how much you care with flair! Find fun date ideas here! http://g.msn.ca/ca55/224
RE: [gentoo-dev] reorganization of /var/lib gentoo-related files
Hi, this possible reorganization will impact how many packages and which one ? Thanks :P > Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:31:12 +0100 > From: gen...@gentoo.org > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] reorganization of /var/lib gentoo-related files > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:12:23 +0100 > Fabio Rossi wrote: > > > I'm proposing to reorganize the files related to Gentoo > > inside /var/lib. Currently we have this situation (at least on my > > system): > > > > /var/lib/eselect > > /var/lib/gentoo/enews > > /var/lib/herdstat/ > > /var/lib/module-rebuild > > /var/lib/portage > > > > The main dir should be something like /var/lib/gentoo, so I'd see all > > gentoo-related files as > > > > /var/lib/gentoo/eselect > > /var/lib/gentoo/enews > > /var/lib/gentoo/herdstat/ > > /var/lib/gentoo/module-rebuild > > /var/lib/gentoo/portage > > > > What do you think about? > > Any reason for that? Aesthetics aren't a very compelling argument IMO, > and the FHS also seems to favor the current layout (in my > interpretation at least, as we're not really talking about > "inter-related applications" in technical terms). > > Marius > _ Show them the way! Add maps and directions to your party invites. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/events.aspx
Re: [gentoo-dev] A friendly reminder: Ciaran McCreesh is not a Gentoo dev
Amen to that too, but can you post the actual comments that he said ? 2012/6/21 Homer Parker > On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 23:01 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > > Just a short note as it seems some confusion arises lately: > > > > Ciaran McCreesh is not a Gentoo dev and his words don't represent > > the position of Gentoo development team. > > > > > Amen. > > -- > Homer Parker > -- Salut alp Sylvain
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: udev <-> mdev
Hi all, about the Mdev stuff, Slashbeast from Funtoo.org started that project a while ago. https://github.com/slashbeast/mdev-like-a-boss I think that it's actually working pretty good on his box. Some Coredevs from Funtoo are actually running with that stuff. Sylvain 2012/7/13 William Hubbs > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 08:13:43PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 01:49:32AM +0300, Maxim Kammerer wrote > > > On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Richard Yao wrote: > > > > mdev would need to switch to the netlink hotplug interface. > > > > > > I think that's quite unlikely, since mdev is not a daemon. Perhaps by > > > the time /proc/sys/kernel/hotplug is gone, mdev advocates will have > > > settled on some early udev fork. [1] > > > > Do you realize this would effectively kill linux in the embedded > > device area? Udev, even without the systemd code, is simply to large > > for embedded devices. > > What about using devtmpfs alone? > > William > -- Salut alp Sylvain
[gentoo-dev] Questions about SystemD and OpenRC
Hi everyone, for a couple of months now, I see on the list some of activities about OpenRC been ported to FreeBSD or OpenRC to Debian and other stuff related to SystemD. I have some basic questions about all that : 1. The SystemD and Udev projetcs are merged now, so what is the impact on the Gentoo on a short term period ? 2. I saw on some lists that Gnome/Kde and Xfce plan to use some SystemD API, so does it means that we will need to install SystemD aside of OpenRC ? 3. In a long term vision, can OpenRC still exist on a Gentoo box(OpenRC might be able to boot the box then give the control to SystemD/Udev for the rest of the boot process) or we will need to migrate to SystemD to be able to use Gnome/Kde or Xfce ? 4. Finally, is there any reason why Gnome/Kde/Xfce wants to add deps related to SystemD ? I don't understand why these desktops want to depend on a specific Sysint Thanks ! Sylvain aka d2_racing
Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about SystemD and OpenRC
The KDE team seems to work on that too : http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=134052539215508&w=2 Now I understand why some devs are working hard to make Mdev working with OpenRC. They want to replace Udev/SystemD with Mdev/OpenRC and solve this situation. Sylvain aka d2_racing 2012/8/7 Rich Freeman > On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Peter Stuge wrote: > > Yes, but if the upstream that is Gnome decides to start depending on > > systemd features then that's their decision, and the place to discuss > > if it's good or bad (more important, the place to change it!) would > > be within the Gnome project. > > More or less, but again my goal was not to start another discussion - > just to inform. Anybody inclined to comment on whether this is good > or bad should go look at the list archives and see if any of the 400 > messages in the last month already covered their points. > > > > > I guess Gentoo will always continue to offer the best of upstream. > > I don't think Gentoo has to limit itself to what upstream supports (I > don't think anybody would look at Prefix and say that this was what > any upstream had in mind). However, the bottom line is that to do > something exotic takes effort, so nothing will happen unless somebody > makes it happen. > > > > > OTOH, if upstream goes and make some change that means a regression > > for Gentoo users, then they deserve bug report floods from their users! > :) > > Perhaps, but don't count on it going anywhere. With Gnome 3 they must > already have pretty thick skin. I suspect upstream would say that if > you want a smooth desktop experience you shouldn't be running Gentoo. > To some degree they probably even have a valid point. Gentoo is about > more than a just-works desktop so I think the best we'll be able to > offer is a "reasonable" experience. If things get really integrated > you might see some Sabayon-like forks favoring particular DEs/etc, and > as long as those forks contribute to our main tree I think that is > good for all of us. > > Rich > > -- Salut alp Sylvain
Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about SystemD and OpenRC
Yeah me too, and the best solution win then :P 2012/8/9 Peter Stuge > Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > > So let people make their OpenRC+mdev systems without systemd, and let > > people make their systemd+udev systems without OpenRC. Everybody wins. > > I for one expect nothing less of Gentoo. > > > //Peter > > -- Salut alp Sylvain
[gentoo-dev] Any official position from Gentoo about systemd, mdev and udev-static ?
Hi everyone, I don't want to start a flamewar on that subject, but I would like to know if there's any official position about the current situation. I saw on the forum this thread : https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-934678-highlight-.html and maybe it could be part of a solution to have OpenRC and udev together. So, is there any developments lately ? Thanks ! d2_racing -- Salut alp Sylvain
RE: [gentoo-dev] openrc stabilization todo
Hi everyone, I think that the best should be to release a migration guide just before the official release and also a news on the first page of Gentoo.org Sylvain Alain d2_rac...@gentoo.org > Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 18:05:09 -0600 > From: willi...@gentoo.org > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: [gentoo-dev] openrc stabilization todo > > All, > > I have been helping lately with the maintenance of openrc/baselayout-2. > > I was just asked today on IRC about posting stabilization plans to the > list. > > I don't have a stabilization plan, so, what I am going to do is post a > question to the list. > > What still needs to be done before we can talk about stabilizing > openrc/baselayout-2? I haven't seen a todo list posted anywhere, and > there are several bugs out there related to openrc. > > This is not an attempt to rush the stabilization, I just want to find > out what still needs to be done. > > Please add your comments to this thread so I can put together a todo > list. > > Thanks, > > -- > William Hubbs > gentoo accessibility team lead > willi...@gentoo.org _ Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9691816
RE: [gentoo-dev] openrc stabilization todo
Hi Christian, the guide back in 2008 and it's ok for the OpenRC stuff, but for the network part. maybe we could add some examples from this thread : http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-796647-postdays-0-postorder-asc-highlight-openrc-start-0.html my $0.02 Sylvain > Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 00:03:52 +0100 > From: christ...@bricart.de > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc stabilization todo > > Joshua Saddler schrieb: > > On Thu, 3 Dec 2009 02:44:47 + > > Sylvain Alain wrote: > >> Hi everyone, I think that the best should be to release a migration guide > >> just before the official release and also a news on the first page of > >> Gentoo.org > > > > You really should have checked our doc repo before sending your mail: > > > > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/openrc-migration.xml > > > > I, Cardoe, and Uberlord wrote it back in April 2008[1]. > > > > [1] > > http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/openrc-migration.xml > > mentioning possible migration issues and pointing at the docs above: > > (AFAIK the only) documentation handling networking migration states: > > +-- > | ... > | Also, /etc/conf.d/net no longer uses bash-style arrays for > | configuration. > | Please review /usr/share/doc/openrc-/net.example > | for configuration instructions. Conversion should be relatively > | straight-forward, for example a static IP assignment would change > | as follows: > | ... > +-- > (and no - more complex examples are *not* described > in /u/s/d/o/net.example as stated..) > > Apart from that, the newnet file will be /etc/conf.d/network .. > > Regarding USE=-oldnet migrations, that are actually *using* oldnet Bash > arrays within /etc/conf.d/net (like me) are left alone and not even > Funtoo has a porting guide.. > > my $0.02 > Christian > > > _ Windows Live: Friends get your Flickr, Yelp, and Digg updates when they e-mail you. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9691817
RE: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Remove cups from default profile to solve circular deps
+1 for disabling it by default, long as it's done with care, because it pretty hard for a newbie to understand what the hell is going on on his first installation and a lot of people use the desktop profile since it's one of the best way to install Gentoo for the first time. Sylvain > Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 00:06:10 +0200 > From: ssuomi...@gentoo.org > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Remove cups from default profile to solve > circular deps > > On 03/01/2010 11:24 PM, Ben de Groot wrote: > > For some reason beyond my understanding, we have the cups useflag > > enabled by default in profiles. This has started to generate circular > > dependencies, at least for desktop profile users (gtk -> cups -> > > poppler -> gtk). I propose we no longer enable the cups useflag. > > > > Cheers, > > +1 for disabling it by default, long as it's done with care > > for example, see how it will change the pkgs using USE cups, some might > need a + default flag or they might get defaulted to "lpr" > > (and that is really only a example) > _
RE: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki
Hi everyone, Gentoo-Quebec already use MediaWiki and I can say that for the spam prevention measures it can be pretty simple : For a new user, he needs to send an email to a specific adress, alos he needs to have a valid account on the forum just to be sure that he is not a spambot. So basically, only members of the forum can write something on the wiki. For the rest, if you need a moderator or a writer on that project, I can help :P Finally, I recommend that on the Wiki team, the best team should be : experimented users (power users), users,moderators and Gentoo Devs for specific areas. > Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:04:38 -0400 > From: guy.fonta...@videotron.qc.ca > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki > > Hi ! > > I maintain Gentoo-Québec wiki. I'm not the only one as d2_racing and some > other members also do. I maintain CSS, examples and wrote almost 60% of the > stuff. > > If you think I could help, please just let me know. > > The wiki : > > http://gentoo-quebec.org/wiki/index.php/Accueil > > Guy Fontaine > _ Hotmail & Messenger are available on your phone. Try now. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724461
RE: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki
> Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 01:37:03 +0200 > From: sp...@gentoo.org > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki > > On 04/03/10 16:46, Ben de Groot wrote: > >> I propose to use MediaWiki. > > > > As I said in my other post, MediaWiki and MoinMoin should, in my > > opinion, be on our shortlist to consider. > > My vote on MediaWiki, too. > > (I do like DokuWiki better for personal things but mediaWiki seems the > best choice for a project this large.) > > Btw was it Fedora having moved from MoinMoin to MediaWiki? > I remember something like that, could be erring though. > > > >> Here's another idea: > >> The German Wikipedia uses a concept called "sighted revisions". If you > >> visit an article without logging in you will see the latest sighted > >> revision, as an identified user you can also view the latest revision. > > > > That's an interesting idea, which we should consider. > > I'm not sure if that a thing to go for. Drawbacks: > - More work (whereas we could use more manpower already) > - New bottlenecks > > Couldn't we just make two big "namespaces" > > 'devs'-- Developers only > 'registered' -- Full edit access to any registered user > > in the same wiki and have pages be in either namespace, reflecting the > namespace in the page name or path somehow? > > I expect that to be > - easy to implement > - providing a good mix of openness and quality control > > > > GuideXML documents are often experienced as an unnecessary > > barrier. > > I think you should clearly state again that this is not gonna replace > GuideXML, just migrate a few use cases where a wiki fits better. > This is what you aim for, right? > > > > Sebastian > I hope that you will not migrate the GuideXML inside the wiki, because it's so simple to write documentations inside a wiki and right now the unofficial Gentoo Wiki is clean and simple. If you want to have registered users and contributors, then you need to use a standard syntaxe wiki. Sylvain aka d2_racing _ Got a phone? Get Hotmail & Messenger for mobile! http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724464
RE: [gentoo-dev] [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki
> Show me a wiki that produces such beautiful code samples (with titles). Show > me a wiki that can produce the following formatting for ebuilds: > > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xml-guide.xml#doc_chap2_sect7 > > . . . or a wiki that makes it super-easy to add all sorts of additional > in-line formatting to regular paragraphs, for example all the blue > highlighting for code used throughout > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xml-guide.xml, or the monospace font used for > filesystem paths. > > Show me a wiki that makes it easy to create tables, for example, compare > RadeonProgram from the x.org wiki: > > http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonProgram?action=edit > > ||<-2 style="text-align: center; background-color: #66"> '''Native''' > || '''R100''' > || '''R200''' > || '''R300''' > || '''R400''' > || '''RS690''' > || '''R500''' > || '''R600''' > || '''R700''' || > > > . . . that's one line of cells. One. Ugly. Compare it to: > > http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/xml-guide.xml#doc_chap5_pre1 For the record, mediawiki support CSS with the utilization of wiki modeles, so you can do almost anything that you want : http://gentoo-quebec.org/wiki/index.php/Guide_installation_configuration_syst%C3%A8me_de_base Tables, code box etc... My friend Guy coded a lot of wiki modeles and I can almost do anything I want if he coded what I wanted. _ Live connected. Get Hotmail & Messenger on your phone. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724462
RE: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project
> Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 23:37:31 +0200 > From: zeera...@gmail.com > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project > > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 10:15:21PM +0300, Markos Chandras wrote: > > On Monday 05 April 2010 21:12:49 Ben de Groot wrote: > > > After the mostly positive feedback on the recent wiki discussion, we > > > have now gone ahead, formed a preliminary team consisting of both > > > users and developers, and put up a project page [1]. All constructive > > > feedback on this new project is welcome. > > > > > Thank you for all your hard effort > > +1 It's great to see that this project is starting :-) > > > > We'd also like to invite any users and developers, who are willing to > > >[..] > > > - moderation > > I am willing to join the moderation userspace > > > > > > 1: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/wiki/ > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > -- > > Markos Chandras (hwoarang) > > Gentoo Linux Developer > > Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org > > > > If someone could give me a description of what "internal organization of the > wiki" intails I might be willing to help out with it (being that it's > something I actually know about ;) ) otherwise I'd be more than willing to > help out with moderation. > > -- > Zeerak Waseem I'd like to help with the moderation too Sylvain aka d2_rac...@gentoo.org _ Videos that have everyone talking! Now also in HD! http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724465
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project
The official wiki can be use by powerusers who want to write some pretty good doc. A lot of powerusers can write excellent doc on the gentoo forum right now, so they don't need to by Gentoo Dev to right excellent stuff. I don't see your point. > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > From: dirtye...@gentoo.org > Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project > Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 14:56:04 -0600 > > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 22:13:07 +0200 > Ben de Groot wrote: > > > On 8 April 2010 21:51, Ryan Hill wrote: > > > why are we setting up a user wiki when a very popular one already exists? > > > > Because some devs request things like this: > > > > > can we can lock certain pages down to dev edits only? > > > > In our wiki we will be able to. > > you misunderstood me. i've wanted a dev wiki for years. i just don't see why > it should also be promoted as a user wiki when one already exists. > > > -- > fonts,by design, by neglect > gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect > wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 _ Videos that have everyone talking! Now also in HD! http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724465
RE: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project
Indeed, that's why I don't want to have a wiki for devs only. The Gentoo wiki must be for the community and by the community :P There are many Gentoo experts that don't want to be officially devs. d2_racing > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > From: dirtye...@gentoo.org > Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Gentoo Wiki Project > Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 16:55:36 -0600 > > On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 21:37:46 + > Sylvain Alain wrote: > > > > > The official wiki can be use by powerusers who want to write some pretty > > good doc. > > > > A lot of powerusers can write excellent doc on the gentoo forum right now, > > so they don't need to by Gentoo Dev to right excellent stuff. > > > > I don't see your point. > > They already write great stuff on http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/. I think having > two different places to put this kind of stuff might split the contributor > base. It'd be nice if we could either merge the two or make the official > wiki about developing with Gentoo rather than how to use Gentoo, but in any > case I'm just happy to have somewhere to stick things. > > > -- > fonts,by design, by neglect > gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect > wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 _ Live connected. Get Hotmail & Messenger on your phone. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9724462
Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc portage news item
2011/4/14 Thomas Beierlein > On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 12:51:55 +0200 > Tomá? Chvátal wrote: > > > On Thursday 14 of April 2011 13:32:04 Kfir Lavi wrote: > > > When i run world update, I usually don't really check all the > > > written stuff. > > > > > > If I do this, I'm sure a lot more Gentoo users do the same. > > > So do expect people rebooting the machine without checking what > > > your have wrote. > > > This can be a major headache if you have few systems that are doing > > > auto updates. > > > I would solve this issue by stopping the emerge and getting the > > > attention of the user. > > > If I don't get the attention of the user, no openrc will be > > > installed. It should be something like emerge -C ... 1 .2 3 4 5... > > > > > > To conclude, you can't issue such a change without proper > > > confirmation from the user. > > > > > This was discussed multiple times, news items are to be read. > > Users ignore elog informations/web announcements/... so it was agreed > > that news item is agressive enough to user so they must read it. > > If they don't do so it is just their fault. > > And no runtime changing for portage where it expect some input is > > seriously stupid idea, most of us script updates in batch and noone > > would actualy read it. > > > > Never the less as I said we expect user to read that stuff and if he > > does not he is on his own due to his dumb approach. > > Maybe we should underline our intention by having that policy > documented in the installation handbook. A good place may be section 2 > "Working with > Gentoo" (http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=2). > > At least all newbies will stumble upon it once. > > Regards, > Thomas. > Yeah, before the stabilization of OpenRc and Baselayout 2.x, the Gentoo handbook really need to be updated too. I don't see how a newbie should be able to install his box with an outdated handbook. -- Salut alp Sylvain
