On 26-11-2018 21:13:53 +, Andrey Utkin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:45:54AM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > We agree it is hackish, and we agree we can do without. You simply
> > exaggerate the problem, IMO, which mostly isn't there, because it works
> > fine today. It can also be
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:45:54AM +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> We agree it is hackish, and we agree we can do without. You simply
> exaggerate the problem, IMO, which mostly isn't there, because it works
> fine today. It can also be solved today using shell tools.
I am sad that you don't see
On Wed, 2018-11-21 at 11:45 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > > > > 5. **Metadata is not compressed.** This is not a significant
> > > > > > problem,
> > > > > >it is just listed for completeness.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Goals for a new container format
> > > > > >
On 21-11-2018 10:33:18 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > > 2. **The format relies on obscure compressor feature of ignoring
> > > > >trailing garbage**. While this behavior is traditionally
> > > > > implemented
> > > > >by many compressors, the original reasons for it have become long
On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 12:00 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 18-11-2018 10:38:51 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 10:16 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > On 17-11-2018 12:21:40 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > Problems with the current binary package format
> > > >
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 12:00:48 +0100
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> Your point is that the format is broken (== relies on obscure compressor
> feature). My point is that the format simply requires a special tool.
> The fact that we prefer to use existing tools doesn't imply in any way
> that the format
On 11/18/18 6:51 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 5:40 PM Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>> On 11/18/18 1:55 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> My idea is to basically have portage generate a tag with all the info
>>> needed to identify the "right" package, take a hash of it, and then
>>>
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
>>>
On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 5:40 PM Zac Medico wrote:
>
> On 11/18/18 1:55 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > My idea is to basically have portage generate a tag with all the info
> > needed to identify the "right" package, take a hash of it, and then
> > stick that in the filename. Then when portage
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
>> generated.
>> 2) encode the hostname of
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
> generated.
> 2) encode the hostname of the machine that generated the file
> 3) encode the
See attached.
Replying off list because I am not on the whitelist ...
--
Regards,
Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
--- Begin Message ---
On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 5:04 AM Roy Bamford wrote:
> On 2018.11.18 09:38, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sun, 2018-11-18
On 2018.11.18 09:38, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 10:16 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 17-11-2018 12:21:40 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Problems with the current binary package format
[snip]
> > > 2. **The format relies on obscure compressor feature of ignoring
> > >
On 18-11-2018 10:38:51 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 10:16 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 17-11-2018 12:21:40 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Problems with the current binary package format
> > > ---
> > >
> > > The following
On Sun, 2018-11-18 at 10:16 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 17-11-2018 12:21:40 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Problems with the current binary package format
> > ---
> >
> > The following problems were identified with the package format currently
> >
On 17-11-2018 12:21:40 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> Problems with the current binary package format
> ---
>
> The following problems were identified with the package format currently
> in use:
>
> 1. **The packages rely on custom binary archive format
On Sat, 2018-11-17 at 14:05 +, Roy Bamford wrote:
> On 2018.11.17 11:21, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Here's a pre-GLEP draft based on the earlier discussion on gentoo-
> > portage-dev mailing list. The specification uses GLEP form as it
> > provides for cleanly specifying the
On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 9:05 AM Roy Bamford wrote:
>
> Does this proposal allow for installing the payload without
> the use of the Gentoo package manager from some random
> distro being used as a rescue media?
>
Yes, it is a tarball of tarballs. There would be an extra step, but a
vanilla
On 2018.11.17 11:21, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a pre-GLEP draft based on the earlier discussion on gentoo-
> portage-dev mailing list. The specification uses GLEP form as it
> provides for cleanly specifying the motivation and rationale.
>
>[snip glep proposal]
> --
> Best regards,
Hi,
Here's a pre-GLEP draft based on the earlier discussion on gentoo-
portage-dev mailing list. The specification uses GLEP form as it
provides for cleanly specifying the motivation and rationale.
(Note: the number assignment is not official, just took the next number
to satisfy the glep
20 matches
Mail list logo
