On Sun, 17 Feb 2013, Rick \Zero Chaos\ Farina wrote:
I would be very happy to have the licensing issues fixed, it looks
like it won't be fun, however I was originally told that redist was
a required right for things to be added to linux-firmware at all so
I fear a lot of things may be out of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 00:06:19 -0500
Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/16/2013 10:11 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Can we please stop removing individual firmware packages
On 17/02/13 12:05, Michał Górny wrote:
savedconfig is a cheap hack. It lacks all the features USE flags have.
Really. We're talking here about replacing well-organized packages with
one cheap hack for the laziness of a few developers. But that's how
Gentoo worked for a long time.
This is how
Regarding licensing issues, maybe we could take fedora package as
reference for clarifying firmware licenses and so:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/linux-firmware.git/tree/linux-firmware.spec
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 12:09:22 +0200
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 17/02/13 12:05, Michał Górny wrote:
savedconfig is a cheap hack. It lacks all the features USE flags have.
Really. We're talking here about replacing well-organized packages with
one cheap hack for the
In the last time I'm helping some other arches (also arches which I have no
interest) because they appears understaffed.
Days ago, I tried to make a virtual machine with qemu, for SH since the dev-
machine[1] is a bit slow; well, I discovered we have no ISO[2] available and
there is no
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 05:03:43PM +0100, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
Now, imho, we have 2 choice:
1)Support them with an iso or at least a manual if we can't do an handbook
2)Lose the stable keyword and don't waste manpower anymore.
We also have another choice if there is so little interest in
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 7:08 AM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
1.) No new firmware is being added to the linux kernel anymore, so this
doesn't apply at all.
Of course it applies — interaction of make modules_install with
emerging linux-firmware can result in collisions. And
Maxim Kammerer schrieb:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina
zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote:
Kernel sources providing /lib/firmware itself shouldn't be a problem
either, as that's just a dir, which many packages may own. The
individual firmware files would be a problem, but
Rick Zero_Chaos Farina schrieb:
What is everyone's opinion of adding a USE=firmware option to pull in
PDEPEND=linux-firmware in linux-2.eclass?
No, USE flags that trigger only dependencies and do not change the
package should be restricted to virtuals or metapackages, with as few
exceptions as
Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
On 16/02/2013 14:08, Pacho Ramos wrote:
sys-firmware/iwl3945-ucode
sys-firmware/iwl4965-ucode
Are these included in linux-firmware (i.e. could we just remove them) or
not?
These are included in linux-firmware. And because Intel has EOL'ed the
chipsets, it is
Peter Stuge schrieb:
linux-firmware is okey but not great. The high resolution is there, which was
my main concern, but
it's not so easy to know how to create a savedconfig without installing
the package.
Just create a text file
/etc/portage/savedconfig/sys-kernel/linux-firmware with the
Am Sonntag, 17. Februar 2013, 17:03:43 schrieb Agostino Sarubbo:
In the last time I'm helping some other arches (also arches which I have no
interest) because they appears understaffed.
Days ago, I tried to make a virtual machine with qemu, for SH since the dev-
machine[1] is a bit slow;
Hi all
I'm taking a look at etherpad-lite ebuild at
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328897
It's a pretty big of a mess, but as I'm searching around, I can't really
find any guidelines on how nodejs / npm stuff is supposed fit in with
Portage. dev-nodejs/ doesn't even exist.
Is
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Andreas K. Huettel
dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Joking aside, I can imagine architectures where it's preferable to set up a
stage directly from a running maintenance system (maybs s390???). Also, none
of my arm gadgets comes with a CD drive, so I had to e.g.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/17/2013 04:03 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
In the last time I'm helping some other arches (also arches which I
have no interest) because they appears understaffed.
Days ago, I tried to make a virtual machine with qemu, for SH since
the
On Sunday 17 February 2013 19:36:16 Markos Chandras wrote:
First you need to tell us what arches you think they are considered
'minor' and/or understaffed so we can finally document that. Then, in
my opinion, the ideal approach would be to just drop the stable
keywords for them.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/17/2013 07:43 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2013 19:36:16 Markos Chandras wrote:
First you need to tell us what arches you think they are
considered 'minor' and/or understaffed so we can finally document
that. Then, in
On Sunday 17 February 2013 20:22:00 Markos Chandras wrote:
I am not sure what are you trying to prove here.
I point out that there is not iso, no manual, no manpower.
No project page does not mean the arch is minor or dead or whatever.
For me this means that there is no enough support.
Leho Kraav wrote:
I'm taking a look at etherpad-lite ebuild at
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328897
It's a pretty big of a mess, but as I'm searching around, I can't really
find any guidelines on how nodejs / npm stuff is supposed fit in with
Portage. dev-nodejs/ doesn't even
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Agostino Sarubbo a...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2013 19:36:16 Markos Chandras wrote:
First you need to tell us what arches you think they are considered
'minor' and/or understaffed so we can finally document that. Then, in
my opinion, the ideal
On Sunday 17 February 2013 13:14:28 Alec Warner wrote:
It is not
clear to me why you would email the -dev list about these arches,
vapier is pretty responsive over email and irc.
I don't guess is a good idea have a private conversation and then drop an
arch...
--
Agostino Sarubbo / ago -at-
On 16/02/2013 13:08, Ben de Groot wrote:
Questions can be directed to our IRC channel #gentoo-qt or email
q...@gentoo.org
So what's the final word on the move?
dev-qt/core or dev-qt/qt-core ?
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/17/2013 08:40 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2013 20:22:00 Markos Chandras wrote:
I am not sure what are you trying to prove here.
I point out that there is not iso, no manual, no manpower.
No manual does not mean no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/17/2013 09:30 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2013 13:14:28 Alec Warner wrote:
It is not clear to me why you would email the -dev list about
these arches, vapier is pretty responsive over email and irc.
I don't guess is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 02/17/2013 09:35 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 16/02/2013 13:08, Ben de Groot wrote:
Questions can be directed to our IRC channel #gentoo-qt or email
q...@gentoo.org
So what's the final word on the move? dev-qt/core or dev-qt/qt-core
?
On 17/02/2013 23:04, Markos Chandras wrote:
We will use qt* instead of qt-*[1] to match the way upstream names the
modules. So that would be dev-qt/qtcore etc
Thanks, and thanks for the link, as I wouldn't have known how to rename
the deps myself otherwise...
--
Diego Elio Pettenò —
On 02/17/2013 11:03 AM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
In the last time I'm helping some other arches (also arches which I have no
interest) because they appears understaffed.
Days ago, I tried to make a virtual machine with qemu, for SH since the dev-
machine[1] is a bit slow; well, I discovered we
Le dimanche 17 février 2013 à 21:08 +0200, Leho Kraav a écrit :
Hi all
I'm taking a look at etherpad-lite ebuild at
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=328897
It's a pretty big of a mess, but as I'm searching around, I can't really
find any guidelines on how nodejs / npm stuff is
On 18/02/2013 00:39, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
I have package some nodejs stuff related to rethinkdb in my overlay if
you want to have a look. Namely lessc and coffee-script. There is close
to no packaging (let alone decent) with nodejs apps but if you are
motivated enough, maybe there is
Le lundi 18 février 2013 à 00:42 +0100, Diego Elio Pettenò a écrit :
On 18/02/2013 00:39, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
I have package some nodejs stuff related to rethinkdb in my overlay if
you want to have a look. Namely lessc and coffee-script. There is close
to no packaging (let alone
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
On 17/02/2013 23:04, Markos Chandras wrote:
We will use qt* instead of qt-*[1] to match the way upstream names the
modules. So that would be dev-qt/qtcore etc
Thanks, and thanks for the link, as I wouldn't
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2013-02-17 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
media-tv/ivtv-firmware 2013-02-11 05:02:06 cardoe
net-wireless/zd1201-firmware2013-02-11 14:15:51
On 18/02/2013 00:46, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
rethinkdb is a young project and its build system is a 1.5k lines
makefile horror. I wouldn't reintroduce stuff that isn't used in tree
just for this. I, at least, am not interested in moving this to the
tree. I just added it to my overlay for
Markos Chandras posted on Sun, 17 Feb 2013 21:36:53 + as excerpted:
On 02/17/2013 09:30 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2013 13:14:28 Alec Warner wrote:
It is not clear to me why you would email the -dev list about these
arches, vapier is pretty responsive over email and
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 18:40:10 +0100
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
Peter Stuge schrieb:
linux-firmware is okey but not great. The high resolution is there, which
was my main concern, but
it's not so easy to know how to create a savedconfig without installing
the
On Sun, 17 Feb 2013 12:42:11 +0100
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
I would justify it through keeping things split and bit-exact clean,
instead of tightly integrated.
Separate ebuilds mean that:
- each firmware has proper license,
- each firmware can be installed separately and
The current output format for listing a chain of dependencies produces
one long flat line that can be hard to read. For example, if you mask
dev-lang/ruby and then try to install dev-ruby/json, you'll see:
The following mask changes are necessary to proceed:
(see package.unmask in the
On 02/17/2013 06:21 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
The current output format for listing a chain of dependencies produces
one long flat line that can be hard to read. For example, if you mask
dev-lang/ruby and then try to install dev-ruby/json, you'll see:
Looks like the comments got stripped by
On Sunday 17 February 2013 22:18:30 Zac Medico wrote:
On 02/17/2013 06:21 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
The current output format for listing a chain of dependencies produces
one long flat line that can be hard to read. For example, if you mask
dev-lang/ruby and then try to install
40 matches
Mail list logo
