[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Duncan
Ulrich Mueller [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 07 May 2008 16:55:39 +0200: The decoder of lzma-utils is also written in C only. So it would also be possible to compile lzmadec without any need for C++. Just call make in subdirs liblzmadec and lzmadec.

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 03:04 Wed 07 May , Mike Frysinger wrote: This is your one-day friendly reminder ! The monthly Gentoo Council meeting is tomorrow in #gentoo-council on irc.freenode.net. See the channel topic for the exact time (but it's probably 2000 UTC). If you're supposed to show up, please show

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So it would also be possible to compile lzmadec without any need for C++. Just call make in subdirs liblzmadec and lzmadec. What about USE=decode-only or something similar for lzma-utils, then? If desired, it could even be masked on normal profiles, but

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Brian Harring
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 02:03:45AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Requested attendees === PMS: ciaranm, pkgcore dev, portage dev, any other tools that care about versions Might I suggest that if PMS is going to be discussed, a copy of PMS.pdf actually be available

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Graham Murray
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) writes: USE=cxx should do just fine, it will disable the C++-related parts, whatever they are. Sincerely I'd quite like to enable it on my vserver's build chroots too. Should that be USE=-cxx? The help for USE=cxx says that this builds support for

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 8 May 2008 03:57:16 -0700 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 02:03:45AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Requested attendees === PMS: ciaranm, pkgcore dev, portage dev, any other tools that care about versions Might I suggest that if

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Brian Harring
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 12:01:19PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 8 May 2008 03:57:16 -0700 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 02:03:45AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Requested attendees === PMS: ciaranm, pkgcore dev, portage

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 8 May 2008 04:15:10 -0700 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If PMS is going to be discussed in some form, it's a fair request that folks have an easily readable version. The relevant sentence was provided. Had you bothered to read the agenda, you would know this. -- Ciaran

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Luca Barbato
Mart Raudsepp wrote: Hello, Over the course of this year, a lzma-utils buildtime dependency has been added to a few system packages, to handle .tar.lzma tarballs. This has huge implications on the requirement of the system toolchain, which is highly disturbing from a minimal (lets say embedded)

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
Graham Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Should that be USE=-cxx? The help for USE=cxx says that this builds support for C++. It was meant as setting a cxx USE on the ebuild, I wasn't certainly meaning to disable the C++ parts with USE=cxx enabled ;) -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Thu, 08 May 2008, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: So it would also be possible to compile lzmadec without any need for C++. Just call make in subdirs liblzmadec and lzmadec. What about USE=decode-only or something similar for lzma-utils, then? If desired, it could even be masked on

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If PMS is going to be discussed in some form, it's a fair request that folks have an easily readable version. Here you have latest pms revision built without kdebuild-1 spec: http://dev.gentoo.org/~coldwind/pms.pdf It's

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Brian Harring
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 01:44:53PM +0200, Santiago M. Mola wrote: On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If PMS is going to be discussed in some form, it's a fair request that folks have an easily readable version. Here you have latest pms revision built

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: gnome-extra/shermans-aquarium

2008-05-08 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
# Gilles Dartiguelongue [EMAIL PROTECTED] (08 May 2008) # Masked for removal on 8 June 2008. # Builds but as issues here and there. # Not bumpable without fixing dead libs. # See bug #216566. gnome-extra/shermans-aquarium btw, gai for example is masked for removal since January or so, guys

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Brian Harring
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 12:23:39PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 8 May 2008 04:15:10 -0700 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If PMS is going to be discussed in some form, it's a fair request that folks have an easily readable version. The relevant sentence was provided. Had

Re: [gentoo-dev] One-Day Gentoo Council Reminder for May

2008-05-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 01:44:53PM +0200, Santiago M. Mola wrote: Here you have latest pms revision built without kdebuild-1 spec: http://dev.gentoo.org/~coldwind/pms.pdf Already did (hence the bash 3.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Doug Goldstein
Ryan Hill wrote: On Wed, 07 May 2008 16:23:12 +0300 Mart Raudsepp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Over the course of this year, a lzma-utils buildtime dependency has been added to a few system packages, to handle .tar.lzma tarballs. This has huge implications on the requirement of the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:17:08 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's troubling to me that projects are using lzma when it's on disk format isn't even final and the project has security issues. You mean projects like 'GNU tar'? -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Doug Goldstein
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:17:08 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's troubling to me that projects are using lzma when it's on disk format isn't even final and the project has security issues. You mean projects like 'GNU tar'? As far as I know

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Doug Goldstein
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:32:34 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:17:08 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's troubling to me that projects are using lzma when it's on disk format isn't

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Doug Goldstein
Doug Goldstein wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:17:08 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's troubling to me that projects are using lzma when it's on disk format isn't even final and the project has security issues. You mean projects like 'GNU tar'?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:32:34 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:17:08 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's troubling to me that projects are using lzma when it's on disk format isn't even final and the project has

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You miss my point. GNU tar sometimes changes its on disk format (and will be doing so again at some point for xattrs) It's not really important to the discussion, but... The TAR format is designed as such that on disk formats can be extended without

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Robert Buchholz
On Thursday 08 May 2008, Doug Goldstein wrote: Additionally to follow myself up, I believe one of the security issues was execution of arbitrary data either when untarred or just decompressed (assuming a  specially crafted lzma file). Can you please point me to the location where this is

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Fabian Groffen
On 08-05-2008 21:45:00 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: d) too early adoption in critical system packages - once above issues are solved, higher levels should be using it first, before critical system packages (for example shows in the circular dep hell with m4) been there, done that. e) It has

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Santiago M. Mola
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 9:09 PM, Fabian Groffen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: e) It has been suggested the support should have been added with new EAPI instead of local build deps (some of which are missing, for instance in the hand-rolled for-no-reason-whatsoever .tar.lzma format net-tools

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Mart Raudsepp
On N, 2008-05-08 at 21:09 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: e) It has been suggested the support should have been added with new EAPI instead of local build deps (some of which are missing, for instance in the hand-rolled for-no-reason-whatsoever .tar.lzma format net-tools doesn't have a dep in

[gentoo-dev] Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008

2008-05-08 Thread Donnie Berkholz
Hi all, Here is the summary from today's council meeting. The complete log will show up at http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ shortly. Thanks, Donnie Quick summary = Active-developer document: We reviewed it and made some suggestions for improving both the document and the

[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: lzma tarball usage

2008-05-08 Thread Ryan Hill
On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:17:08 -0400 Doug Goldstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ryan Hill wrote: The new lzma-utils codebase uses liblzma, written in C. It's at the alpha stage but supposedly supports encoding/decoding the current lzma format well enough (;P). It probably has some fun bugs to

[gentoo-dev] Lenght of version components [was: Council meeting summary for 8 May 2008]

2008-05-08 Thread Ulrich Mueller
On Thu, 8 May 2008, Donnie Berkholz wrote: PMS: Are versions allowed to have more than 8 digits? - specifically to ask the package maintainers with extremely long PVs whether they were needed and to test the impact