Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)

2006-07-30 Thread Brett I. Holcomb
I am only a user and have been keeping out of this debate but I feel I need to 
at least express my thoughts.  I have been folllowing the Sunrise thread(s) 
since it started.  I have done a couple of ebuilds a long time ago and 
would love to have been able to contribute to Gentoo but due to time 
constraints - not enough of it G - I just can't. 

I have been a longtime Gentoo user and have loved it because A) it had no
rpms (I had to write them for Caldera), B).  It allowed me to configure a 
system for me quickly that ran well without bloat C) It was easy to keep 
updated - no hassling with Yast, yum, apt-get, etc. and D). it was 
dependable - you could download the x86 and know it would work with very few 

However, I am going to be building a new system from scratch and this sunrise 
mess is causing me to revevaluate my choice of distro.  My concerns - first 
for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially anybody to submit almost 
anything with no QA.  It's a BMG that's offical!  My concern - for users - is 
that since it's officially supported they will expect things to work and when 
they don't  - as they will not - Gentoo's reputation will suffer.

Gentoo provides a means for people to participate on several levels.   They 
can do as I did and do a few ebuild and submit them to bugzilla - if there's 
enough demand then they'll eventually get in portage.  They can also take a 
quiz and do ebuilds on a more official level.  Or they can work to be a 
developer.  All of these paths ensure that we have proper QA and control.

The sunrise people seem bent out of shape that ebuilds sit in bugzilla and 
don't get in the tree.  One comment was that it's discouraging. Well, tough - 
the user who submitted it can get over it and realize that the application 
that is so precious to him is not that wonderful to anyone else.  I did with 
mine - I understood that I did them to accomplish something I needed and I 
put them in bugzilla just in case anyone else had a need but I had no 
expectation of them going into portage.  In fact one of my ebuilds was based 
on another ebuild someone put in portage for the same reason - the author had 
a need, wrote an ebuild and then shared it.  If a user really wants his 
ebuild in portage he'll take the quiz and become a more official part of 
Gentoo - but he will have been tested and checked out.

I administer systems (mainly Windows  but also AIX and LInux - and Linux is my 
main home system!) at my job in IT Operations.  Some of my systems can 
shutdown the business if I mess up.  That's why I do things like run upgrades 
on test systems or use VMware to test out before I turn the changes 
loose.  At home I also need my system to run and work.  I won't be 
downloading Sunrise stuff but I UNDERSTAND the consequences - most users will 
not understand as they figure It's gentoo so it works.  Look at the 
confusion with ~arch vs arch.  People go with ~arch and then get upset when 
it breaks.   

I know I'm only one user but I'm really disappointed that the Council turned 
sunrise official.  It gives me serious concern a bout Gentoo's reliablity and 
their reputation.

On Sunday July 30 2006 23:06, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
 On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:50:31 -0400 Seemant Kulleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 | Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a
 | starting place.

 -!- [Users #gentoo-sunrise]
 -!- @genstef devon bonsaikitten_ Zamorate eimono|home dev-zero brebs
 staskorz @nichoj_work eimono SunriseCIA richiefrich +Peper @CHTEKK
 SunriseBot TiCPU shillelagh Juippis

 Ciaran McCreesh
 Mail: ciaran dot mccreesh at


Brett I. Holcomb

-- mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)

2006-07-30 Thread Brett I. Holcomb
My concern is beyond me.  As I  stated I know enough about what to expect IF I 
use sunrise.  But many do not and with it becoming official people figure 
it's gentoo and when it breaks Gentoo suffers.  Gentoo has a reputation as a 
good solid, stable distro.  As user and big fan of Gentoo I'm concerned - why 
couldn't sunrise have stayed unoffical like BMG.  Why does it have to be 
official?  Gentoo can choose to do what it feels is right and I will do the 

I answered only because someone asked for user's concerns well this is mine 
and you all can do with the input as you please without any hard feelings on 
my part.

On Sunday July 30 2006 23:42, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
 OK wait, on your servers, are you actually planning to *use* any of the
 ebuilds in Sunrise's overlay?

 If not, how is it a concern? I personally don't use any of them, and my
 system is running perfectly fine.

 Let's not forget that nobody is shoving Sunrise down anyone's throat...

 Seemant Kulleen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Gentoo Foundation / Gentoo Linux


Brett I. Holcomb
-- mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Let portage symlink latest version of installed docs

2006-04-08 Thread Brett I. Holcomb
Have you submitted a bugzilla as a request or suggestion - that's the best way 
to get it acted on .

On Saturday April 8 2006 11:48, Fabian Neumann wrote:
 Hi Gentoo devs,

 The Problem: I'd like to have bookmarks for my most used documentation
 in my browser. E.g., for the Python documentation this would be
 file:///usr/share/doc/python-docs-2.4.2/html/index.html. But as the
 version number is included in the path, I have to update the bookmark
 every time portage installs a new version of Python.

 What I'd like portage do to is to create a symlink to the latest version
 of a package's documentation. Just omitting the version number would of
 course not work as slotted packages may have multiple versions of docs
 installed.  The first format coming to my mind would be:

 /usr/share/doc/python-docs-latest - /usr/share/doc/python-docs-2.4.2

 If that's impossible because of some Linux standards (I'm really not
 familiar with POSIX, LSB, File System Hierarchy or stuff like this) we
 could use a special directory for this, maybe /usr/share/doc/.latest or
 /usr/share/portage/latest-docs or something similar -- you get the point.

 We could of course make this optional with a USE flag. In face we have
 already the symlink flag that does basically the task for the kernel
 versions.  I don't know if it'd be clever to use it or if we should
 consider introducing symlink-docs for this.

 I hope this informal proposal initializes a discussion and I would be
 very happy to see it in some standardized way in future *-doc-ebuilds.



Brett I. Holcomb
-- mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] make.profile symlink now points nowhere (was default-x86-1.4)

2005-04-08 Thread Brett I. Holcomb
Question here - I made the link to the 2005.0 profile on (NOT 2005.0/2.4) 
a system that is 2.6.11 and has been on 2.6 for months.  Tonight emerge 
-uD system -p wants to upgrade me to a 2.4 kernel!!!  Well, portage this 
is a 2.6.x system - not 2.4 - duh!  From what I found in the mail list 
archives and forums noone has really given a solution.  Some say what 
problem, others give reasons for it but the fact remains - why on a 2.6 
system that has happily been running 2.6 for months does this new profile 
want to give me a 2.4 kernel.  I did follow one suggest and symlink to 
default-linux/x86 directory but I'm afraid that will break something so I 
went back to 2004.0 for the symlink.  And I am at portage so 
that's good.

In short - what do we have to do to upgrade to a current profile on 2.6 
machines and get 2.6 gentoo-source updates, not 2.4.

 On Fri, 8 Apr 2005, David Sparks wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Friday 08 April 2005 07:57 pm, David Sparks wrote:
!!! ARCH is not set... Are you missing the /etc/make.profile symlink?
!!! Is the symlink correct? Is your portage tree complete?

so use 'default-x86-2004.2', emerge portage, and then switch to the cascading
Thanks for the suggestions, I've tried 2004.0 .1 .2 .3 with similar
results as below.
I also tried coping a binary package into /usr/portage/packages/... and
emerging it with the -K option but that didn't go either.
# rm make.profile
# ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2004.2 make.profile
# emerge portage
!!! Your current profile is deprecated and not supported anymore.
!!! Please upgrade to the following profile if possible:
To upgrade do the following steps:
# emerge -n '=sys-apps/portage-2.0.51'
# cd /etc/
# rm make.profile
# ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0 make.profile
# Gentoo has switched to 2.6 as the defaults for headers/kernels.  If
you wish
# to use 2.4 headers/kernels, then you should do the following to upgrade:
# emerge -n '=sys-apps/portage-2.0.51'
# cd /etc/
# rm make.profile
# ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0/2.4 make.profile
# More information can be found at the following URLs:
!!! 'str' object has no attribute 'insert'
!!! 'rm -Rf /usr/portage/profiles; emerge sync' may fix this. If it does
!!! not then please report this to and, if possible, a dev
!!! on #gentoo (
-- mailing list
Brett I. Holcomb
Registered Linux User #188143
Remove R777 to email
-- mailing list