Mike Myers posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat,
25 Feb 2006 14:07:41 -0600:
What do I use if I just want to re-emerge a single package with the same
useflags? Like if something broke or if I'm using an overlay? Like, if
I just wanted to reinstall noatun for instance. Is
On Saturday 25 February 2006 22:29, Drake Wyrm wrote:
What about introducing a new variable in the ebuild file: DIST_PREFIX
that has as default value ${PN}. This should not break anything for
unaware portage versions. For aware portage versions, the files would
be retrieved from
Bug #123923: dev-util/perforce* needs someone to step up as a
maintainer and fix the digest issues. Otherwise QA will get very upset.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat)
Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
When people go out of their way to file a bug for you or a team you are
on. Please _please_ don't be lazy and just close/reassign/other it
with a '.'
A period is the most useless way to respond to a bug. If you can't take
2 seconds out of your life to say something as simple as. 'Fixed in
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 11:40:44AM -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
When people go out of their way to file a bug for you or a team you are
on. Please _please_ don't be lazy and just close/reassign/other it
with a '.'
A period is the most useless way to respond to a bug. If you can't take
2 seconds
Ned Ludd wrote:
232 matches. http://tinyurl.com/pmrmx
The vast majority of which have an explanation in the comment directly
preceding.
--de.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:30:50 -0600
R Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ned Ludd wrote:
232 matches. http://tinyurl.com/pmrmx
The vast majority of which have an explanation in the comment
directly preceding.
In which case it's a moment's effort to cut-n-paste the text into the
On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 14:19 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Two ways this one can occur.
[snip]
Third way ... upstream is a provider of commercial software, and
releases different editions of the same software with identical
filenames.
Side note: if the packages in question are fetch
On Sunday 26 February 2006 14:45, Stuart Herbert wrote:
Also, I cannot find this SRC_URI rule (as being applied by the QA team)
in any official Gentoo policy document.
that's because it's common sense ... filename collisions just dont work
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:45:41 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 14:19 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Two ways this one can occur.
|
| [snip]
|
| Third way ... upstream is a provider of commercial software, and
| releases different editions of the same
I'll contact the council separately, and ask that they look at two
things:
a) What the QA team is and isn't empowered to do
b) The approval process that the QA team must follow before imposing
tree-wide changes on other developers.
According to prior council meeting logs:
15:14 @vapier QA
kxdocker is like Mac OS X's Dock, but more powerful.
It has icons animation like parabolic OSX zoom is a plugin, so if you don't
like this parabolic, you can write own.
http://www.xiaprojects.com/www/prodotti/kxdocker/main.php
Since version 1.0.0 of kxdocker there are now 23 plugins in
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 14:56 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
that's because it's common sense ... filename collisions just dont work
-mike
This set of packages has been this way since October 2003, and if it was
a real problem for users, you'd see that reflected in bugzilla and in
the forums. It
On Sunday 26 February 2006 21:25, Daniel wrote:
Rather than littering kde-misc with more applications I propose using
kde-kxdocker instead.
I'd rather see a kde-themes where to move also stuff like lipstik and keramik
instead of x11-themes...
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò -
On Mon, 2006-02-27 at 07:25 +1100, Daniel wrote:
kxdocker is like Mac OS X's Dock, but more powerful.
It has icons animation like parabolic OSX zoom is a plugin, so if you don't
like this parabolic, you can write own.
http://www.xiaprojects.com/www/prodotti/kxdocker/main.php
Since version
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 20:00 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Then you must talk to upstream and get them to change their ways.
Already covered in the (growing) discussion in bug #123926. UPSTREAM
have previously been contacted over the issue, and have not changed
their release policy.
We don't
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:46:37 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 20:00 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Then you must talk to upstream and get them to change their ways.
|
| Already covered in the (growing) discussion in bug #123926. UPSTREAM
| have previously
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 02:19:40PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Side note: if the packages in question are fetch restricted, you're
screwed, and will not be able to add them to the tree.
Actually, there is a solution for this, and it's reasonable logical.
Don't use the same name that upstream
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:04 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Ok, so given that this is a closed source application, if upstream
won't cooperate on something as simple as this, why do you expect them
to cooperate with you on bugs or security issues?
That's not the issue here. The issue here is
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 21:30:22 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:04 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Ok, so given that this is a closed source application, if upstream
| won't cooperate on something as simple as this, why do you expect
| them to cooperate
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 13:29 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
Simply tell the user to download X and place it in $DISTDIR renaming it
to X-foo-bar, where's you've chosen X-foo-bar to avoid conflicts.
That works for me.
Best regards,
Stu
--
Stuart Herbert
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:54 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 13:29 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
Simply tell the user to download X and place it in $DISTDIR renaming it
to X-foo-bar, where's you've chosen X-foo-bar to avoid conflicts.
That works for me.
Best regards,
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:40 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
The issue is whether you have the right to leave broken packages in the
tree. I don't see any policy document granting you that right.
From a discussion in #-portage, I understand that ferringb has already
told the QA team that file
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
That would work for fetch restricted packages, not nomirrored ones.
--Dan
/me nods. That's what we'll have to do. Unfortunately, it leaves users
with a worse experience than before, but until I can find a way to reach
the QA team and
The following is a small blurb which we would like the council to decide
on at their next meeting. This came about after discussions with QA team
members, the Devrel QA liaison, and a few council members. If anyone
has any suggestions for how it could be improved, I'd appreciate it.
Yes, Gentoo
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 22:17:33 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
| That would work for fetch restricted packages, not nomirrored ones.
|
| /me nods. That's what we'll have to do. Unfortunately, it leaves
| users with a worse
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 22:13:32 + Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:40 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| The issue is whether you have the right to leave broken packages in
| the tree. I don't see any policy document granting you that right.
|
| From a discussion
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:22:17 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Yes, Gentoo is supposed to be fun, but we also have a responsibility
| to our users to ensure we are providing them with the best possible
| distro we can.
What, you mean the tree isn't someone's personal playground?
| *
Duncan wrote
[deleted]
Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation.
Do you know if there's a way or going to be a way to handle the split
ebuilds so that reemerging or unemerging a split ebuild will reemerge or
unemerge the corresponding packages? It seems like the ebuilds are only
intended
My personal opinion here is that a _LOT_ of this should be common sense.
But just to put in my two pennies..
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 05:22:17PM -0500, Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* The QA team's purpose is to provide cross-herd assistance in keeping
the tree in a good state. This is
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 10:58:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| * The QA team will maintain a list of current QA Standards. The
| list is not meant by any means to be a comprehensive document, but
| rather a dynamic document that will be updated as new problems are
|
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 05:22:17PM -0500, Mark Loeser
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| * The QA team's purpose is to provide cross-herd assistance in
| keeping the tree in a good state. This is done primarily by finding
| and pointing
On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 11:21:47PM +, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:11:21 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 05:22:17PM -0500, Mark Loeser
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| * The QA team's purpose is to provide cross-herd assistance in
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| * In the case of disagreement on policy among QA members, the
| majority of established QA members must agree with the action.
|
| Perhaps pushing it to an open forum on -dev/-core for consensus works
| better here?
The problem with that is, it usually ends up
Hi Mark,
Thanks for posting this. I've a few suggestions to make (see below). I
support all the other points in your proposal.
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:22 -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
* In case of emergency, or if package maintainers refuse to cooperate,
the QA team may take action themselves
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 18:41 -0500, Alec Warner wrote:
While you may not think that soliciting comments is useful ( and in some
limited cases I would agree with you ) giving people the opportunity to
comment also means you just covered your ass, in terms of people going
where the hell did that
On Sunday 26 February 2006 16:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:22:17 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Yes, Gentoo is supposed to be fun, but we also have a responsibility
| to our users to ensure we are providing them with the best possible
| distro we can.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
yeah, thats totally understandable. Its a best-efforts thing. I just
don't want neccessary to be deemed true for something which has an
arguable point with technical merit. Blatent mkdir-esque madness would
be more black than white, and I'd hope for this to try and
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
This is meant to prevent the case where the QA team ( or a subset; the
established QA members ) decides to make unilateral changes to the tree
( or large subset thereof ) without even necessarily talking to the
affected developers.
While you may not think
Mark Loeser wrote:
Well, instead of putting the debate into an even larger crowd, this
enables the QA team to act in the way it sees best first. If people
believe we were wrong, then we give them the option to talk to the
council about one of our changes. Also, we aren't unwilling to hear
Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:22 -0500, Mark Loeser wrote:
* In case of emergency, or if package maintainers refuse to cooperate,
the QA team may take action themselves to fix the problem.
I'd like to see this say
* In case of emergency, or after a
Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Well, instead of putting the debate into an even larger crowd, this
enables the QA team to act in the way it sees best first. If people
believe we were wrong, then we give them the option to talk to the
council about one of our
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:22:17 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| * The QA team will maintain a list of current QA Standards. The
| list is not meant by any means to be a comprehensive document, but
| rather a dynamic document that will be
Mark Loeser wrote:
Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Well, instead of putting the debate into an even larger crowd, this
enables the QA team to act in the way it sees best first. If people
believe we were wrong, then we give them the option to talk to the
council
Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
No, it's the exact opposite of what you're saying. You want to commit
first and let the maintainer bring it to the council. I'm saying the
maintainer has the right to have any non-security commit to his/her
package reverted pending a decision.
Yea, I
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 22:17 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
That would work for fetch restricted packages, not nomirrored ones.
--Dan
/me nods. That's what we'll have to do. Unfortunately, it leaves users
with a worse experience
Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote:
When re-assigning, it is extremely useful for the new assignee to see
some relevant text, as this is the first bit of text they may see. If
you just re-assign with '.' then the new assignee has to browse the bug
to decide how to prioritise etc - which means
Daniel Ostrow wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 22:17 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
That would work for fetch restricted packages, not nomirrored ones.
--Dan
/me nods. That's what we'll have to do. Unfortunately, it leaves users
with a
Mark Loeser wrote:
Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The maintainer should be the absolute authority over his/her packages,
and only the council should be able to overrule maintainer decisions in
the case of disagreement between the maintainer and anybody else.
I think it really
Contgrats to the release team :-)
But let me whine a bit, even a few KB:
I just saw the GWN and the news about 2006.0 ...
So reading at the release notes:
This is also the first release with the Gentoo Linux Installer
officially debuting on the x86 LiveCD, which will fully replace the
Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
Contgrats to the release team :-)
But let me whine a bit, even a few KB:
I just saw the GWN and the news about 2006.0 ...
So reading at the release notes:
This is also the first release with the Gentoo Linux Installer
officially debuting on the x86 LiveCD, which
Hi all,
I'm currently heavily involved with jabber-related packages. As a result
I have to struggle with the really seldomn maintained packages in
Gentoo. As an example: ejabberd 1.0 is not in portage until now, it was
released in early december last year. There is not really a reason for
this,
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 22:54 -0500, Andrew Muraco wrote:
I second that there is a massive confusion of naming, and this needs to
get sorted out (or atleast explained) Because I'm sure the mirrors will
start getting slamed with people downloading 2006.0. Lets not waste
anyone's bandwidth nor
Kalin KOZHUHAROV wrote:
yes, I figured out that x86-installcd-2006.0 is the Gentoo 2006.0
Minimal install CD for x86 or is it... will any n00b figure it out?
If a n00b can't figure it out, I would suggest him start from Read The
Fine Handbook
According to the mono herd (latexer), mvideo breaks with mono mono-1.1.x. The
last message to the cvs mailing list was May 2004. That said it isn't under
heavy development, is currently in package.mask, and will be removed in 1
week unless someone wishes to maintain it.
Chris White
As per recommendation the removal time will be 30 days instead. This gives a
better chance for people who want to pick it up.
Chris White
pgpWAFKTsFDBU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 16:29 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Well, instead of putting the debate into an even larger crowd, this
enables the QA team to act in the way it sees best first. If people
believe we were wrong, then we give them the option to talk to the
council
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 19:34 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Mark Loeser wrote:
Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The maintainer should be the absolute authority over his/her packages,
and only the council should be able to overrule maintainer decisions in
the case of disagreement
Lars Strojny wrote:
I'm currently heavily involved with jabber-related packages. As a result
I have to struggle with the really seldomn maintained packages in
Gentoo.
...
To come to an end: jabber is not really the most unimportant thing, so
things should go better. I want to provide my
Hi,
This is an automatically created email message.
http://gentoo.tamperd.net/stable has just been updated with 14452 ebuilds.
The page shows results from a number of tests that are run against the ebuilds.
The tests are:
* if a version has been masked for 30 days or more.
* if an arch was in
Ned Ludd wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 19:34 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
I'm looking at this as innocent until proven guilty versus guilty
until proven innocent. When parties are in disagreement, the _current_
situation should stand until the council (or the two groups in question)
resolves
61 matches
Mail list logo
