Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage user not listed in /etc/shadow ?

2019-01-16 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 16/01/19 12:59, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > On Wed, 2019-01-16 at 12:20 +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> On 16/01/19 11:58, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: >>> How come portage isn't in shadow, only in passwd ? >>> Seems wrong to me. >>> >>> Jocke >>

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage user not listed in /etc/shadow ?

2019-01-16 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 16/01/19 11:58, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > How come portage isn't in shadow, only in passwd ? > Seems wrong to me. > > Jocke Because the portage user never logs on .. hence has no password. That said, it does seem an odd situation, since even users with no password do tend to appear in

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v3] collision_protect: use dynamic report interval

2019-01-08 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 08/01/19 19:15, Zac Medico wrote: > On 1/8/19 5:42 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: >> The reporting of files remaining can look somewhat odd since the report >> interval is hardcoded to be per 1000 objects. Adjust this interval to >> be time based. This means that modern (fast) machines likely will

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Error logs

2018-12-30 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 30/12/18 19:58, Pratyush Das wrote: > Hi, > > In reference to this forum post > - https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1091144-highlight-.html , I was > told that several users found wrong information in the portage error logs > pointing them to the wrong directory for distfiles to be

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Rename PORT_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} variables to PORTAGE_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} Bug 668538

2018-12-17 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 17/12/18 15:51, Michał Górny wrote: > On Mon, 2018-12-17 at 15:44 +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> On 17/12/18 12:54, Michał Górny wrote: >>>> Not only this, but as noted, unless you know the man pages for portage and >>>> make.conf in order to recite them

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Rename PORT_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} variables to PORTAGE_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} Bug 668538

2018-12-17 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 17/12/18 15:44, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 17/12/18 12:54, Michał Górny wrote: >>> Not only this, but as noted, unless you know the man pages for portage and >>> make.conf in order to recite them in your sleep, they are confusing for >>> users, as they do not

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Rename PORT_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} variables to PORTAGE_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} Bug 668538

2018-12-17 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 17/12/18 12:54, Michał Górny wrote: >> Not only this, but as noted, unless you know the man pages for portage and >> make.conf in order to recite them in your sleep, they are confusing for >> users, as they do not necessarily follow an obvious pattern, and it wasn't >> until I was attempting to

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Rename PORT_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} variables to PORTAGE_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} Bug 668538

2018-12-16 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 15/12/18 08:55, Michał Górny wrote: > On Sat, 2018-12-15 at 02:25 +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> This patchset aims to fix potential ambiguity and confusion between older >> PORT_LOG* variables, >> and more recent PORTAGE_* variables - often leading to mysteriously la

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 4/4] Add note to NEWS/ChangeLog for PORT_LOGDIR* changes

2018-12-14 Thread M. J. Everitt
Suggested-by: Michael Everitt Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/668538 --- NEWS | 6 ++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS index b430f273f..e65205c42 100644 --- a/NEWS +++ b/NEWS @@ -1,5 +1,11 @@ News (mainly features/major bug fixes) +portage-next +-- +*

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/4] Renamed PORT_LOGDIR[_CLEAN] to PORTAGE_LOGDIR[_CLEAN]

2018-12-14 Thread M. J. Everitt
To match similar existing PORTAGE_* variables Suggested-by: Zac Medico Acked-by: Michael Everitt Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/668538 --- NEWS | 2 +- cnf/make.conf.example | 12 +- cnf/make.globals

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/4] Provide compatibility support for old PORT_LOGDIR* variable names

2018-12-14 Thread M. J. Everitt
Suggested-by: Zac Medico Acked-by: Michael Everitt Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/668538 --- lib/portage/package/ebuild/config.py | 11 +++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/lib/portage/package/ebuild/config.py b/lib/portage/package/ebuild/config.py index

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/4] Rename PORT_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} variables to PORTAGE_LOGDIR{,_CLEAN} Bug 668538

2018-12-14 Thread M. J. Everitt
! M. J. Everitt (4): Renamed PORT_LOGDIR[_CLEAN] to PORTAGE_LOGDIR[_CLEAN] Provide compatibility support for old PORT_LOGDIR* variable names Update documentation for PORT_LOGDIR* changes Add note to NEWS/ChangeLog for PORT_LOGDIR* changes NEWS

Re: [gentoo-dev] [pre-GLEP] Gentoo binary package container format [gen...@jonesmz.com]

2018-11-19 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/11/18 22:40, Zac Medico wrote: > On 11/18/18 1:55 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 4:10 PM Roy Bamford wrote: >>> Replying off list because I am not on the whitelist. >> That seems odd. >> >>> 1) append a uuid to each filename. Generated when the bin package file is >>>

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] Introduce a tiny init replacement for inside pid namespace

2018-11-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/11/18 09:18, Michał Górny wrote: > On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 09:04 +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> On 18/11/18 08:53, Michał Górny wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Michał Górny >>> --- >>> bin/pid-ns-init| 25 + >>> lib/por

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] Introduce a tiny init replacement for inside pid namespace

2018-11-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/11/18 08:53, Michał Górny wrote: > Signed-off-by: Michał Górny > --- > bin/pid-ns-init| 25 + > lib/portage/process.py | 11 ++- > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 bin/pid-ns-init > > diff --git

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [RFC] Improving Gentoo package format

2018-11-11 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 11/11/18 19:20, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 1:02 PM M. J. Everitt wrote: >> If you can really present a decent argument for replicating the >> functionality of other distros like Debian, Arch, Ubuntu etc then let's >> here it. For now, the strength of

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [RFC] Improving Gentoo package format

2018-11-11 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 11/11/18 18:41, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 12:31 PM M. J. Everitt wrote: >> Binpkgs are also a popular component of a few downstream distro's based on >> Gentoo (thinking pentoo right now as an easy example). >> >> So we don't want to break ex

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [RFC] Improving Gentoo package format

2018-11-11 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 11/11/18 18:15, Duncan wrote [excerpted]: > Is there any interest at all in binpkgs, perhaps when improved, from the > other PMs? Or are they effectively dead now or not interested in binpkgs > even if the format were to be improved, or simply too hard to work with? > Because "it'd be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: What means bup?

2018-09-23 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 24/09/18 03:27, Matthew Thode wrote: > On 18-09-23 21:39:01, Alec Warner wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 6:53 PM M. J. Everitt wrote: >> >>> On 23/09/18 22:27, Kent Fredric wrote: >>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:36:23 -0500 >>>> Matthew Thode w

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: What means bup?

2018-09-23 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 23/09/18 22:27, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Sat, 22 Sep 2018 15:36:23 -0500 > Matthew Thode wrote: >> My hand slipped. What ever happened to assuming the best :( Are you >> going to ping the list every time my hand slips up and I mistype >> something? Not sure you'll have time for it :P >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] udev.eclass: support EAPI 7

2018-09-23 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 23/09/18 16:20, Mike Gilbert wrote: > Signed-off-by: Mike Gilbert > --- > eclass/udev.eclass | 14 +- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/eclass/udev.eclass b/eclass/udev.eclass > index 4f23c9ebbdf8..baf60584938f 100644 > --- a/eclass/udev.eclass >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Solving the problem of huge number of wrong LICENSES=*GPL-[23]

2018-08-26 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 26/08/18 19:14, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > Ühel kenal päeval, P, 26.08.2018 kell 19:14, kirjutas Michał Górny: >> One thing where this would fail would be e.g.: >> >> LICENSE="GPL-2+ >> bar? ( GPL-2 ) >> foo? ( GPL-3+ )" ^ you can't put a comment on the right line > LICENSE="GPL-2+ " >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo i486 support

2018-08-22 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 22/08/18 20:20, Matt Turner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:26 AM Ben Kohler wrote: >> 2) Patch catalyst to start setting CXXFLAGS again. Rather than roll >> back to exactly CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}" again, it's been suggested that we >> start setting COMMON_FLAGS, and CFLAGS="${COMMON_FLAGS}"

Re: [gentoo-dev] [arm17] [PATCH 0/3] toolchain-funcs.eclass: tc-is-softfloat for ARM and associated functions

2018-08-21 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 21/08/18 21:38, James Le Cuirot wrote: > On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 21:33:01 +0100 > James Le Cuirot wrote: > >> I previously sent a single patch to this list entitled >> "Update tc-is-softfloat for new ARM tuples" but I have now added two >> further patches following the initial feedback. >> >> For

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] waf-utils.eclass: WAF_VERBOSE always effectively on

2018-08-15 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 14/08/18 08:03, Joke Junkie wrote: > Fix broken behavior not allowing to change the default verbosity. > This should be of importance to everybody building on SMP systems, since > giving the --verbose option to waf breaks a multi-job build (by making > it one-job), at least for me. This is

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] XARGS: use gxargs for USERLAND=BSD (bug 663256)

2018-08-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/08/18 00:17, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 10/08/18 00:04, Zac Medico wrote: >> For USERLAND=BSD, set XARGS="gxargs -r" if gxargs is available, >> so the code from bug 630292 works for USERLAND=BSD. >> >> Fixes: 50283f1abb77 (install-qa-check.d/60png

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] XARGS: use gxargs for USERLAND=BSD (bug 663256)

2018-08-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/08/18 00:04, Zac Medico wrote: > For USERLAND=BSD, set XARGS="gxargs -r" if gxargs is available, > so the code from bug 630292 works for USERLAND=BSD. > > Fixes: 50283f1abb77 (install-qa-check.d/60pngfix: parallel support (bug > 630292)) > Reported-by: Michał Górny > Bug:

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 5/5] eutils.eclass: Restore the original path_exists function

2018-08-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 08/08/18 22:34, Michał Górny wrote [excerpted]: > +# Example: > +# @CODE > +# if path_exists "${ROOT}"/etc/foo.d/*.conf; then > +# do_something > +# fi > +# @CODE > path_exists() { > - local opt=$1 > - [[ ${opt} == -[ao] ]] && shift || opt="-a" > - > - # no paths -> return false

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Two insecure ownership and group-writability QA checks.​

2018-08-07 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 07/08/18 17:46, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > Changes in v3: > > * Undo the setguid exception from v2, and add a comment explaining why. > * Add line breaks for readability in two comments. > * Try to put back the leading "/" in the output list. > * Remove a superfluous comment mentioning

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Update /usr/portage references (bug 378603)

2018-08-06 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 06/08/18 19:35, Zac Medico wrote: > On 08/06/2018 12:30 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: >> All these changes as well as the catlayst changes need to be >> co-ordinated so that snapshots and portage and stages don't precede the >> docs changes. > I suppose all of the docs changes can be made in advance,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs

2018-08-05 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 05/08/18 18:24, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:01 PM Alec Warner wrote: >> >> Part of my frustration is that seemingly "anything open source related >> can be held in Gentoo" and I'm somewhat against that as I feel it >> dilutes the Gentoo mission. We are here to make a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs

2018-08-05 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 05/08/18 18:01, Alec Warner wrote [excerpted]: > > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Richard Yao > wrote: > > > > On Jun 23, 2018, at 6:59 AM, Alec Warner > wrote: > >> >> I suspect this might be better done in the Linux

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree (was: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2018-07-29)

2018-07-29 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 29/07/18 21:01, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > Why not stick the repos in /var/repos and not /var/db/repos? If we're > just making up paths, why not make up a shorter one? I don't think > any other linux distros use /var/db... > *BSD I believe .. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital

Re: [gentoo-dev] [arm17] Background to ARM 17.0 profile migration

2018-07-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 25/07/18 00:07, James Le Cuirot wrote: > My initial migration guide was rather scary as changing CHOST is never > easy and I was concerned that such a guide was never going to be > sufficiently palatable for a news item. I didn't expect to be able to > script it up but I gave it a shot and I'm

Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding USE=udev to linux profiles

2018-07-20 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 20/07/18 13:39, n...@troglodyte.be wrote: > Hi, > > July 20, 2018 2:26 PM, "Ben Kohler" wrote: > >> On 07/19/18 23:04, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> If you really want to enable it globally after being told that it's bad >>> engineering and downright annoying, go do it in a profile

Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding USE=udev to linux profiles

2018-07-20 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 20/07/18 13:20, Ben Kohler wrote: > On 07/19/18 20:54, Mikle Kolyada wrote: > >> +1. widely used profiles should have as least flags enabled by default >> as possible, I would not be happy with +udev on my servers. >> > I disagree with this premise. The default and most widely used profiles >

[RFC] Commit messages - WAS Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: What means bup?

2018-07-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/07/18 13:20, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 07/18/2018 02:10 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> I often find myself in the >> need to use/invent some abbreviation in order to fit the limit. >> Considering this is an error, this sends the message that short is >> preferred over clear. > Or that

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree

2018-07-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/07/18 21:09, William Hubbs wrote: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:54:35PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: >> On 07/09/2018 03:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote: >>> On 09/07/18 23:12, Zac Medico wrote: >>>> On 07/09/2018 02:34 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >>>>

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree

2018-07-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 09/07/18 23:12, Zac Medico wrote: > On 07/09/2018 02:34 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> I'd mostly argue any such change should only affect new systems >> > Yes, changing defaults for existing systems would be annoying. > > My recommendation is to have catalyst set the new defaults in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: Portage rsync hardlink support

2018-07-08 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 08/07/18 18:34, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 9:02 AM Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> On 07/08/2018 08:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> Is safe git syncing implemented already? If not, maybe finish it first and >>> cover both with a single news item. Git is going to be more

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: Portage rsync hardlink support

2018-07-08 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 08/07/18 10:21, Zac Medico wrote: > On 07/08/2018 02:15 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> >> Are you sure about that? That might have been the case so far but this >> hardlink tree may actually tip the balance. > Even if it takes twice a long (which it doesn't), the difference is > negligible for

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

2018-07-03 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 03/07/18 21:01, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote: >>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing >>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? >> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain. > Like I

[gentoo-dev] Re: Hostile takeover of our github mirror. Don't use ebuild from there until new warning!

2018-06-28 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 28/06/18 22:54, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) wrote: > El 28/06/18 a las 23:15, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) escribió: >> Hi! >> >> I just want to notify that an attacker has taken control of the Gentoo >> organization in Github and has among other things replaced the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/4] xdg-utils.eclass: make EAPI 7 ready

2018-06-20 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 21/06/18 03:38, Jason Zaman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 06:01:10PM -0500, Marty E. Plummer wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 11:33:53PM +0100, James Le Cuirot wrote: >>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2018 17:21:09 -0500 >>> "Marty E. Plummer" wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 09:03:44PM +0800,

Re: Implicit use of versionator.eclass in ebuilds and eclasses (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: eclass/)

2018-05-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 19/05/18 01:01, Andreas Sturmlechner wrote: > On Freitag, 18. Mai 2018 23:53:06 CEST Michał Górny wrote: >> One of the reasons we do mailing list reviews of widely used eclasses is >> to let people tell you that you've left 'version_is_at_least' here. > I see the error of my ways. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Access to DRM render nodes from portage sandbox?

2018-05-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 09/05/18 20:31, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 07:54:16PM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> ^ That is relatively common knowledge .. my question was more steered >> towards whether Eudev is carrying this feature through as well (which >> likely as they might

Re: [gentoo-dev] Access to DRM render nodes from portage sandbox?

2018-05-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 09/05/18 19:50, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:12:32 +0100 > "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.ever...@iee.org> wrote: > >>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Matt Turner <matts...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> It's worth noting that the def

Re: [gentoo-dev] Access to DRM render nodes from portage sandbox?

2018-05-09 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 09/05/18 18:10, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 11:51 PM, Dennis Schridde wrote: >>> Hello! >>> >>> I see sandbox violations similar to "ACCESS DENIED: open_wr: /dev/dri/ >>>

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] depgraph.autounmask_breakage_detected: ignore REQUIRED_USE violations (bug 654782)

2018-05-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 04/05/18 06:22, Zac Medico wrote: > When autounmask USE changes violate REQUIRED_USE, rather than > recalculate with autounmask disabled, display the autounmask USE > changes along with the REQUIRED_USE violation. Adjust unit tests > to allow for the autounmask USE changes that were previously

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Mailing list moderation and community openness

2018-03-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 27/03/18 17:39, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:12 PM, Martin Vaeth wrote: >> Rich Freeman wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 3:34 AM, Martin Vaeth wrote: It is about openness vs. isolation. >>> I'm pretty sure most

Re: [gentoo-dev] Mailing list moderation and community openness

2018-03-21 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 22/03/18 00:33, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > Most contributions should happen via patches on b.g.o > Who was lamenting about the every-increasing bug queue on this Very list recently? And what about those 5+ year old bugs that are rotting for packages long last-rited from the tree ?

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --ignore-world [ y | n ] option (bug 608564)

2018-03-21 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 21/03/18 23:26, M. J. Everitt wrote: > n 20/03/18 04:49, Manuel Rüger wrote: >> Hi Zac, >> >> alternatively could --exclude be extended to support sets? >> So users could --exclude @world or @profile. >> >> Cheers, >> Manuel >> > The id

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --ignore-world [ y | n ] option (bug 608564)

2018-03-21 Thread M. J. Everitt
n 20/03/18 04:49, Manuel Rüger wrote: > Hi Zac, > > alternatively could --exclude be extended to support sets? > So users could --exclude @world or @profile. > > Cheers, > Manuel > The idea is sound enough, but I fear the syntax would be too confusing. Reading a potential command-line as "emerge

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category?

2018-03-20 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 21/03/18 01:27, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 14:48:29 -0400 > Michael Orlitzky wrote: > >> There's a real technical problem hidden in there. Since npm >> (recursively!) bundles every dependency, nobody worries about >> compatibility in their JS packages. You'll

Re: [gentoo-dev] things becoming better and better

2018-03-19 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 19/03/18 18:48, Toralf Förster wrote: > honestly. > > > When I started with my tinderbox 2 or 3 years ago I had often a fair > amount of manual work to made to get an image up and running - moslty > tweaking USE flags to get blockers being solved. This yielded into a > growing list of fixed USE

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News Item v2: Portage rsync tree verification unstable

2018-03-11 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 12/03/18 04:53, Duncan wrote: > Zac Medico posted on Sun, 11 Mar 2018 19:57:31 -0700 as excerpted: > >> I really don't want to spend a lot of time making revisions, and I think >> "unstable" communicates well enough in this case. > Very well then. With robbat2's already accepted first

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: Portage rsync tree verification unstable

2018-03-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/03/18 21:22, Zac Medico wrote: > Please review. This is needed in order to resolve > https://bugs.gentoo.org/650072. > 2) Once the 'rsync-verify' USE flag has been unmasked as described > in step 1, it can be enabled with a line like the folling in > /etc/portage/package.use:

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge --search: use slash to auto-detect category (bug 647940)

2018-02-19 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/02/18 21:27, Zac Medico wrote: > Since search strings containing a slash do no work unless category > match mode is enabled, use slash to auto-detect category match mode, > so that users do not have to prefix the search string with the special > @ symbol. > > Bug:

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] repoman: Add commit message verification

2018-02-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/02/18 16:28, Brian Dolbec wrote: > On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 13:18:03 + > "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.ever...@iee.org> wrote: > >> Might I suggest breaking out checks into a separate module? I think >> that hard-coding it all is likely to become a pain as time g

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] repoman: Add commit message verification

2018-02-17 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 17/02/18 12:56, Michał Górny wrote: > Add a check for common mistakes in commit messages. For now, it is > pretty rough and works only for -m/-F. It will be extended to work > in the interactive mode in the future. > --- > repoman/pym/repoman/actions.py | 74 >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: council members and appeals

2018-02-13 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 13/02/18 20:57, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn > wrote: >> Dean Stephens schrieb: >> Suppose that the council decides to accept an appeal from comrel. Is it a conflict of interest for a member of the council

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-crypt/monkeysign

2018-02-13 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 13/02/18 10:47, Michael Palimaka wrote: > On 02/12/2018 08:59 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> # Kristian Fiskerstrand (11 Feb 2018) >> # Lastrite: app-crypt/monkeysign . Please use caff from >> # app-crypt/signing-party instead. Removal in 30 days. >> # Bug: #647352 >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: baselayout 2.5 changes

2018-02-08 Thread M. J. Everitt
ing about it. > > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 10:17:59PM +, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> >> On 08/02/18 22:13, William Hubbs wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: >>>> However, there are plenty of examples of commands that normal u

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: baselayout 2.5 changes

2018-02-08 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 08/02/18 22:13, William Hubbs wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> However, there are plenty of examples of commands that normal users >> may run from sbin. Moving these commands often causes problems for >> packages that either hard code absolute paths,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0074: Remove single filesystem limitation

2018-02-08 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 08/02/18 17:09, Michał Górny wrote: > Remove the limitation that all files covered by the Manifest must reside > on a single filesystem. This breaks valid uses of overlayfs without > providing any real advantage. > > The removal is justified further in the updated rationale section. > --- >

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 6/9] rsync: Issue an explicit warning if Manifest timestamp is >24hr old

2018-02-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 02/02/18 20:42, Michał Górny wrote[excerpted]: > index 27a2548c0..cb80f6d66 100644 > --- a/pym/portage/sync/modules/rsync/__init__.py > +++ b/pym/portage/sync/modules/rsync/__init__.py > @@ -109,6 +110,20 @@ class RsyncSync(NewBase): > writemsg_level("!!!

Re: [gentoo-dev] [News item review] Portage rsync tree verification (v3)

2018-01-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 27/01/18 14:26, Michał Górny wrote [excerpted]: > The verification is implemented via using app-portage/gemato. Currently, > the whole repository is verified after syncing. > I would drop either 'via' or 'using' - they both are the same verb/meaning and one is hence redundant. Just my 2c as a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [News item review] Portage rsync tree verification

2018-01-25 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 25/01/18 11:01, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 01/25/2018 11:04 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > >> The verification is implemented using app-portage/gemato. Currently, > ... "implemented in", as opposed to "using"? its implemented using > various cryptographic primitives, but gemato is the

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

2018-01-16 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 16/01/18 21:56, Róbert Čerňanský wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:58:11 +0100 > Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > >> On 01/16/2018 03:45 PM, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: >>> Given the situation, we have a choice: Remove GnuCash altogether, or >>> press ahead with recommending a version

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

2018-01-11 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 11/01/18 03:18, Benda Xu wrote: > Hi MJ, > > "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.ever...@iee.org> writes: > >> Not entirely as a #gentoo-nit-pick .. I'm slightly unclear on the >> different between 2.6.16+ and 2.6.32+ .. should this potentially be >> 2.16.16-32 pe

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

2018-01-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/01/18 23:35, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 6:27 PM, M. J. Everitt <m.j.ever...@iee.org> wrote: > >> I think Roy's point is quite valid .. if you want to cut out users from >> contribution why are you even posting on -dev ML in the first place? > Pro

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

2018-01-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/01/18 23:20, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Roy Bamford wrote: >> Being somwhat old and cynical, I'm seeing signs of history >> repeating itself. >> >> Does being 'struck off' the list in this way apply to devs, including >> Council and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

2018-01-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/01/18 19:31, Alec Warner wrote: > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Michał Górny > wrote: > > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 09∶11 -0800, użytkownik Matt Turner > napisał: > > On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

2018-01-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/01/18 14:55, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 10/01/18 08:55, Lars Wendler wrote: >> Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... > Gentoo has already had the reputation of being an elitist club for > years. As such I'd like to see steps to remedy this status, rather than > taking

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

2018-01-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/01/18 13:49, kuzetsa wrote: > On 01/10/2018 05:57 AM, David Seifert wrote: >> On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 08:55 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: >>> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:48:56 +0300 Eray Aslan wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:20:56PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > * Posting to the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

2018-01-10 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 10/01/18 14:00, kuzetsa wrote: > On 01/09/2018 08:21 AM, Aaron Bauman wrote: >> On January 8, 2018 9:39:47 PM EST, Benda Xu wrote: >>> Hi kuzetsa, >>> >>> kuzetsa writes: >>> The term "beyond" feels wrong & confusing. (Not sure what to replace

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] preserve-libs.eclass: Split off preserve_old_lib from eutils.

2018-01-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 04/01/18 11:36, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 04/01/18 11:21, David Seifert wrote: >> On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 10:43 +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: >>> On 04/01/18 10:23, Pacho Ramos wrote: >>>> El mié, 03-01-2018 a las 17:13 +0100, Ulrich Müller escribió: >>>

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] preserve-libs.eclass: Split off preserve_old_lib from eutils.

2018-01-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 04/01/18 11:21, David Seifert wrote: > On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 10:43 +0000, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> On 04/01/18 10:23, Pacho Ramos wrote: >>> El mié, 03-01-2018 a las 17:13 +0100, Ulrich Müller escribió: >>>> Split off functions preserve_old_lib and pre

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 1/2] preserve-libs.eclass: Split off preserve_old_lib from eutils.

2018-01-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 04/01/18 10:23, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El mié, 03-01-2018 a las 17:13 +0100, Ulrich Müller escribió: >> Split off functions preserve_old_lib and preserve_old_lib_notify from >> eutils.eclass into a dedicated preserve-libs.eclass. These functions >> are rarely used and are independent of the rest

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] skel.ebuild: Update comments for inherit, SLOT, KEYWORDS.

2017-12-31 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 31/12/17 19:59, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> +1, but I'm not going to suggest what to replace it with. > How about one of these examples: > "eautoreconf function from autotools.eclass" > "tc-getCC function from toolchain-funcs.eclass" > > Ulrich I second eautoreconf (with mention of eapply_user

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: repo/gentoo:master commit in: dev-libs/libunibreak/

2017-12-16 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 16/12/17 17:45, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 14. Dezember 2017, 13:21:47 CET schrieb Fabian Groffen: >> Can we make it a policy to list /what/ QA issues are the justification >> for commits like these? A description in the commit message would be >> preferred, but a pointer to a

Re: [gentoo-dev] AMD64 Arch Testers needed urgently

2017-12-14 Thread M. J. Everitt
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 truth. I understand not wanting to answer if I am > completely clueless, and would like to

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists

2017-12-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 04/12/17 00:37, Matt Turner wrote: > A user requested I forward this information to the mailing list: > > There's been research, on this, and the study by harvard business > school was summarized and discussed by NPR in 2015: > > [ Turns out toxic coworkers are more > than just an annoyance. A

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

2017-11-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 27/11/17 20:44, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 11/27/2017 03:37 PM, Arve Barsnes wrote: >> Sounds kind of weird? If he has keyworded the game package, shouldn't it >> just never install that version if it depends on an unstable package? > That's right, but if there are two available ~arch

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

2017-11-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 27/11/17 20:34, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:15 PM, M. J. Everitt <m.j.ever...@iee.org> wrote: >> On 27/11/17 18:44, Christopher Head wrote: >>> For those of us who run mostly stable systems, there is one question I >>> don’t know a

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEWS item for games destabling

2017-11-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 27/11/17 18:44, Christopher Head wrote: > For those of us who run mostly stable systems, there is one question I don’t > know a good answer to. > > If I add a specific version of a game to package.accept_keywords, I will get > that version forever. That’s not really what I want: I prefer to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2017-11-22 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 21/11/17 21:01, Manuel Rüger wrote: > Packages up for grabs: > > * app-crypt/yubikey-manager-qt > * sys-apps/etckeeper > * sys-auth/yubico-piv-tool > * dev-libs/libsodium > * app-editors/retext > * sys-apps/rkflashtool > * dev-embedded/esptool > * app-shells/thefuck > * app-crypt/paperkey > *

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC, PATCH] user.eclass: gracefully return when unprivileged

2017-11-19 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 20/11/17 03:38, hero...@gentoo.org wrote: > From: Benda Xu > > Thanks MJ, how about "Unprivileged to execute"? Less bytes. > > enewgroup and enewuser does not apply when executed as a normal > user, e.g. under Gentoo Prefix. > --- > eclass/user.eclass | 8 > 1

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC, PATCH] user.eclass: gracefully return when unprivileged.

2017-11-19 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 20/11/17 03:25, hero...@gentoo.org wrote: > From: Benda Xu > > enewgroup and enewuser does not apply when executed as a normal > user, e.g. under Gentoo Prefix. > --- > eclass/user.eclass | 8 > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs: sys-process/parallel

2017-10-28 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 28/10/17 22:02, Jonas Stein wrote: > Dear all, > > The following packages are up for grabs: > > sys-process/parallel > > after retirement of the proxied maintainer. > (https://bugs.gentoo.org/633090) > > https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/sys-process/parallel > > The ebuild was defacto

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] GLEP 74: Full-tree verification using Manifest files

2017-10-27 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 28/10/17 03:41, Dean Stephens wrote: > On 10/27/17 17:48, Hanno Böck wrote: >> Should a package manager reject a sync if it is too old? or not install >> packages if a sync hasn't happened for some time? What is considered >> "outdated"? I think that should be clarified how exactly it's

Re: [gentoo-dev] FEATURES=splitdebug and debugedit

2017-10-12 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 12/10/17 22:24, Francesco Riosa wrote: > hi, > > FEATURES=splitdebug at the moment require package dev-util/debugedit > which is a lagging behind upstream. > However package app-arch/rpm (from which debugedit is forked) always > install the same binary in ${ROOT}/usr/libexec/rpm/debugedit.

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.26 and changes with SunRPC, libtirpc, ntirpc, libnsl (NIS and friends), ...

2017-09-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/09/17 16:36, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Am Montag, 18. September 2017, 14:28:37 CEST schrieb M. J. Everitt: >> >> >> Would a virtual help any? Probably overlooking a good number of factors, >> but wasn't mentioned yet ... >> > So far I don't see how.

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.26 and changes with SunRPC, libtirpc, ntirpc, libnsl (NIS and friends), ...

2017-09-18 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 18/09/17 10:56, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > So glibc-2.26 is already out for some time, but we still haven't keyworded it > yet. Why? > > * I want to use the opportunity to make the long-delayed switchover from > glibc-internal SunRPC (long deprecated and outdated) to external >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [FRC] News item: Changing USE flags for >=app-backup/bacula

2017-08-15 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 15/08/17 18:49, tom...@gentoo.org wrote: > I think we can find a proper formulation for the use flag description in > metadata.xml, e.g.: > > director - Installs the backup director additional to the default file daemon. > storage-daemon - Installs the storage daemon additional to the default

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Rewrite doins in python (bug 624526)

2017-08-14 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 14/08/17 08:39, Zac Medico wrote: > From: Hidehiko Abe > > doins is written in bash. However, specifically in case that > too many files are installed, it is very slow. > This CL rewrites the script in python for performance. > > BUG=chromium:712659 > TEST=time

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --autounmask-keep-keywords option (bug 622480)

2017-08-13 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 14/08/17 01:19, Zac Medico wrote [excerpted]: > You'll get the same result as --autounmask-use-only if you use > --autounmask-keep-keywords together with --autounmask-keep-masks. > > This way, we can also add --autounmask-keep-license and > --autounmask-keep-use options if we want, and the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --autounmask-keep-keywords option (bug 622480)

2017-08-13 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 12/08/17 19:08, Zac Medico wrote: > The option prevents --autounmask from making changes to > package.accept_keywords. This option does not imply > --autounmask-keep-masks, so --autounmask is still allowed > to create package.unmask changes unless the > --autounmask-keep-masks is also

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Revisions for USE flag changes

2017-08-13 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 13/08/17 11:11, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/12/2017 10:52 PM, Duncan wrote: >> How so? Are you arguing that deciding to system-wide switch to/from >> pulseaudio, systemd, or gstreamer is nonsense? >> > The meaning of any one USE flag varies widely across packages. I could > never say "I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: sys-boot/plymouth needs major fixes/maintainer

2017-08-04 Thread M. J. Everitt
On 05/08/17 03:16, Michael Palimaka wrote: > On 08/05/2017 12:37 AM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: >> On R, 2017-08-04 at 14:23 +, Lucas Ramage wrote: >>> I am looking into this for openrc. I copied it over to my personal >>> overlay. >> Ok, how about I mark myself as maintainer then and add you as co

  1   2   3   >