-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 07:58:59 -0400
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please, everyone, go back and read the actual *facts* that were
discovered using copies of *our* repositories before going around
using data from
On 3/31/07, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
regardless of whether someone wishes to help fix bugs (thanks by the way), i
dont think we want to unmask these
Loud and clear - over.
That means it's going right into my local overlay until my son
eventually gets tired of playing pingus.
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 02:06:14PM +0200, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
That means it's going right into my local overlay until my son
eventually gets tired of playing pingus.
Just install Doom :-]
cheers,
Wernfried
--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gentoo Forums:
On 3/30/07, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a good topic for the next council meeting i think would be to start up a spec
of requirements that a package manager must satisfy before it'd be an
official package manager for Gentoo ... off the top of my head:
- the main developers need to
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:02:28 +0200
Christopher Covington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first condition you list is a sort of nativism that I for one
would expect not to find in a successful copyleft project created on
the Internet. Why should the code Gentoo uses be written by Gentoo
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 20:16 +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 20:02:28 +0200
Christopher Covington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first condition you list is a sort of nativism that I for one
would expect not to find in a successful copyleft project created on
the Internet.
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:24:03 -0400
Seemant Kulleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The point being made, then, is that for an official package manager to
exist *for Gentoo*, it needs to be under *Gentoo's* control.
Well, the source is open, and there are already enough Gentoo devs working
on it, so
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:24:03 -0400
Seemant Kulleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To make it more clear. If the gcc developers decided to stick some
malicious code into gcc, it affects the entire linux community, the
entire BSD community and would take out a few other communities as
well. The
we've noticed that many things in the tree abuse the fact that the portage
helpers utilize environment variables to communicate ... for example, people
setting DOCDESTTREE by hand rather than using `docinto`
unless some one can give me a valid reason for this stuff, the plan is to fix
these
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:24:03 -0400
Seemant Kulleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To make it more clear...If an official package manager is outside of
Gentoo's control, and the maintainer(s) of that piece of software decide
to do anything malicious (examples: inject some
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Andrej Kacian wrote:
Christopher Covington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first condition you list is a sort of nativism that I for one
would expect not to find in a successful copyleft project created on
the Internet. Why should the code Gentoo uses be written by
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 15:24:03 -0400
Seemant Kulleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To make it more clear. If the gcc developers decided to stick some
malicious code into gcc, it affects the entire linux community, the
entire BSD community and would take out a few other communities as
well. The
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 23:27:19 +0100
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Bennett wrote:
... Gentoo developers can take the latest release of said package
manager and continue development from that. That's the wonderful
thing about the GPL, no?
Too late for all the affected users
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
That's uncalled for. There's no need to get nasty.
I applaud your intent, but feel it would have far more effect on the
atmosphere if applied to a few of your devs, rather than users who employ
milder terms?
It just seems knowingly unfair, and I don't believe that is
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 23:39 +0100, Steve Long wrote:
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
That's uncalled for. There's no need to get nasty.
I applaud your intent, but feel it would have far more effect on the
atmosphere if applied to a few of your devs, rather than users who employ
milder terms?
It
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Too late for all the affected users tho. Point is it's a major
security hole which no sane organisation would even consider for
mission-critical code.
These arguments are getting weaker and weaker...
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:21:01 +0100
Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
For the curious, Paludis non-compliance is being tracked at [2]. So
far as I'm aware, there's no central list for Portage or Pkgcore
non-compliance.
Nice doc. I'm
Michael Krelin wrote:
The question is whether scripts that, say, parse emerge -pv output have
to carry on working.
I think this requirement would put portage itself in quite uncomfortable
situation.
It's a non-issue imo; it's up to script authors and maintainers (aka users)
to keep up
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
The effects are far reaching and shared by everyone. If an official
package manager is outside of Gentoo's control, and the maintainer(s) of
that piece of software decide to do anything malicious (examples: inject
some dodgy code, remove documentation, take out access
On Sunday 01 April 2007, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
On Sat, 2007-03-31 at 23:39 +0100, Steve Long wrote:
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
That's uncalled for. There's no need to get nasty.
I applaud your intent, but feel it would have far more effect on the
atmosphere if applied to a few of your
Hello.
Path of some utilities in coreutils-6.7-r1 changed from /usr/bin to /bin
and vice versa. This cause some scripts became broken as they relied on
the full path to executable. The question is: does there exist best
practice on how to avoid this problem in future? Should we set some
default
I've gone ahead and ported the namespace changes for HEAD into gentoolkit
so it can now import modules properly. If the new-style modules fail it
will fall back to the old-n-busted import style, keeping backwards
compatability for people with different portage versions.
I also removed the string
22 matches
Mail list logo
