Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 2:52 AM, Christian Kniep wrote: > Hey there, > > as for the /etc/hostname when sharing /etc/ as a volume… This ain’t a > problem as /etc/hostname is taken care of by the docker-engine (in previous > versions they used it to discover other hosts). >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Empty project: ADA

I've sent a patch to this list which adds Ada support. I believe the Ada stuff already in Gentoo should be removed and we can start again, fresh. If we can get this patch in, then use the ada-overlay, then ebuilds can start to be migrated from there to the main repo, it'll be much cleaner than

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 03:12 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> > That seems like a fair compromise. Those who want /etc/hostname get to > use it, those who don't won't need to change anything. > Does anyone want it? This feels like a legacy backwards compatibility hack that we're adding after it's obsolete,

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 07:37 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: > > I imagine _someone_ out there wants it, otherwise we wouldn't be > discussing it. The thread started out proposing it as a solution to a docker problem that, it turns out, isn't a problem. Why are we still trying to fixing something that isn't

[gentoo-dev] Looking for people willing to take care of Cinnamon

Hello Most Gnome team member are not willing to keep maintaining cinnamon ebuilds (specially since most of us are not even using it and, also, we already have enough load with Gnome ebuilds alone).  We were wondering if maybe some other people would be willing to maintain them under a new

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:17:58PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today > it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one > maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only > concerned about if the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Looking for people willing to take care of Cinnamon

On 08/24/2016 11:26 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Hello > > Most Gnome team member are not willing to keep maintaining cinnamon > ebuilds (specially since most of us are not even using it and, also, we > already have enough load with Gnome ebuilds alone). > > We were wondering if maybe some other

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 07:32:05PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:57:43 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > I thought about dropping the version number from the > > display-if-installed line, but that doesn't make sense because it means > > that everyone,

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 04:17 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/24/2016 03:12 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >>> >> That seems like a fair compromise. Those who want /etc/hostname get to >> use it, those who don't won't need to change anything. >> > > Does anyone want it? This feels like a legacy backwards

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On 2016-08-24 23:59, William Hubbs wrote: > Since OpenRC is used outside of Gentoo, a warning like this would have > to be: > > * /etc/init.d/test uses runscript and must be converted to openrc-run > * For more details see the OpenRC NEWS file > > because we don't know where or if the file will

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 2016-08-24 22:23, Consus wrote: > On 09:42 Wed 24 Aug, Zac Medico wrote: > > On 08/24/2016 09:33 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > > * no benefit put forth so far, other than that it's the same file that > > > systemd uses, which is true but not beneficial as far as I can tell > > > > It's

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 07:41:42PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2016-08-24 19:07, William Hubbs wrote: > > I do not plan to drop runscript at this point, that will happen when > > openrc-1.0 is released, which will be a while yet. > > ...and that's the reason why I don't think this needs

[gentoo-dev] Reproducing a bug found by the tinderbox

Hi All, sorry, if this has been asked or explained before, but google and the gentoo wiki couldn't find any answers. I just got my first bug found by the tinderbox and would like to reproduce the environment (chroot) that the bug was found in. There is some nice info about it in the bug, but I

Recruiting process (Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care)

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Over the years, the base-system package herd has grown in size. Today > it comprises 320 packages, of which 61 of those have more than one > maintainer. The packages with more than one maintainer I'm only > concerned

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

Mike Gilbert posted on Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:49:42 -0400 as excerpted: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Michael Orlitzky > wrote: >> On 08/24/2016 07:37 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >>> >>> I imagine _someone_ out there wants it, otherwise we wouldn't be >>> discussing it. >> >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On second thought I put in the —hostname flags, to make it clearer. Before it was a digest from the container-id, which was not telling in the example… $ docker run -d -v /etc/ --name host1 --hostname host1 ubuntu tail -f /dev/null 6a85473421368051efec9b6f55991a5c3b4150c575a0724695cdad99f7a26e06

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/23/2016 12:57 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 02:45:20PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: >> Symlinking /proc into /etc/hostname is still useful because it not >> only handles container hostnames (keep in mind that two containers >> could share the same /etc), but it also covers

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:57:43 -0500 William Hubbs wrote: > I thought about dropping the version number from the > display-if-installed line, but that doesn't make sense because it means > that everyone, including all new installs of OpenRC after this version, > would have to

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

Hey there, as for the /etc/hostname when sharing /etc/ as a volume… This ain’t a problem as /etc/hostname is taken care of by the docker-engine (in previous versions they used it to discover other hosts). As you can see in the snippet below, /etc/hostname is local, while it is possible to create

[gentoo-dev] Re: Empty project: ADA

On 08/22/2016 05:58 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Now https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Ada is empty While not using any Ada thing myself, occasionally I'm in need to fully bootstrap upstream gcc, which requires C,C++,Ada compilers these days. There's some basically accepted patches in [1]

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

William Hubbs wrote: > > I am planning to change the logic in /etc/init.d/hostname so that if > /etc/hostname exists, the first word out of that file will be used as > the hostname rather than any setting in /etc/conf.d/hostname. You could also make the content of the

Upgrading Old Gentoo - Was Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On 24/08/16 15:08, Pacho Ramos wrote: > This reminds me a question I have for some time: is it documented in > some place what are the steps to follow for updating old systems? I > remember posts like: > http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/ > > but I don't know if that

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 07:32:05PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:57:43 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > I thought about dropping the version number from the > > display-if-installed line, but that doesn't make sense because it means > > that everyone,

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 10:59:21 -0400 waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: > These things get left in forever. I once filed a bug report > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=569056 because the warning that > English word lists in vim had been removed was still present *TWO YEARS* > after the fact.

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Lars Wendler wrote: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. What's the time frame for lifting that restriction? There are some

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > General increase in the number of developers in base-system would not be > a bad outcome from this email either ;-). I am considering joining, if only to have some input and greater transparency on decision making.

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On 08/24/2016 11:32 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Lars Wendler > wrote: >> Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so >> we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. > > What's the

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/24/2016 07:37 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> >> I imagine _someone_ out there wants it, otherwise we wouldn't be >> discussing it. > > The thread started out proposing it as a solution to a docker problem > that, it

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 11:49 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > You're right that the orignal purpose of the change has been debunked. > > So, starting over: one real benefit would be cross-compatibility with > systemd. It's one less thing people would need to reconfigure when > migrating to/from openrc. > I

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 09:06 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/24/2016 11:49 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> >> You're right that the orignal purpose of the change has been debunked. >> >> So, starting over: one real benefit would be cross-compatibility with >> systemd. It's one less thing people would need

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 12:22 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > > Seems like something we could automate in pkg_posinst of the openrc > ebuild, but probably also deserves a news item. > Or in the systemd ebuild =P I'll drop this, I've made my peace: * adding another configuration file is inconsistent with

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 08/24/2016 09:33 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > * no benefit put forth so far, other than that it's the same file that > systemd uses, which is true but not beneficial as far as I can tell It's a de facto standard. Being different for the sake of being different is not a virtue in cases

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 07:32:05PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:57:43 -0500 > William Hubbs wrote: > > > I thought about dropping the version number from the > > display-if-installed line, but that doesn't make sense because it means > > that everyone,

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 04:05:05PM +0200, Lars Wendler wrote: > On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:08:30 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > >On 8/23/16 8:03 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: > >> I have some kind of interest for these packages: > > > >Lars, maybe once we get some names we should get a meeting of >

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 08:11:38PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:17:58PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > net-misc/dhcpcd (upstream?) > > I maintain dhcpcd; I'm not sure why it is on this list. > In fact, there is a stablereq still pending on 6.11.1-r1. > > Upstream

Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

On 2016-08-24 19:07, William Hubbs wrote: > I do not plan to drop runscript at this point, that will happen when > openrc-1.0 is released, which will be a while yet. ...and that's the reason why I don't think this needs a newsitem. There's _no_ problem and no _immediate_ user interaction is

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On 09:42 Wed 24 Aug, Zac Medico wrote: > On 08/24/2016 09:33 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > * no benefit put forth so far, other than that it's the same file that > > systemd uses, which is true but not beneficial as far as I can tell > > It's a de facto standard. Being different for the

[gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs

This package is now up for grabs: net-irc/rbot -- Lars Wendler Gentoo package maintainer GPG: 21CC CF02 4586 0A07 ED93 9F68 498F E765 960E 9B39 Attention! New gpg key! See https://www.gentoofan.org/blog/index.php?/archives/9-New-gpg-keys.html pgpfOxyZA4prL.pgp Description: Digitale Signatur

[gentoo-dev] Re: newsitem: openrc runscript transition (draft 3)

Kent Fredric posted on Wed, 24 Aug 2016 19:32:05 +1200 as excerpted: > On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 17:57:43 -0500 William Hubbs > wrote: > >> I thought about dropping the version number from the >> display-if-installed line, but that doesn't make sense because it means >> that

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

El mié, 24-08-2016 a las 16:05 +0200, Lars Wendler escribió: > [...] > Oh, and to all new team members: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, > so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old > systems. > > > Kind regards > Lars This

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 20:08:30 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote: >On 8/23/16 8:03 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: >> I have some kind of interest for these packages: > >Lars, maybe once we get some names we should get a meeting of >base-system together and coordinate our efforts. In particular, I >mostly

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 08/24/2016 07:37 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> >> I imagine _someone_ out there wants it, otherwise we wouldn't be >> discussing it. > > The thread started out proposing it as a solution to a docker problem > that, it

Re: [gentoo-dev] base-system needs developers who care

Am Mittwoch, 24. August 2016, 16:05:05 schrieb Lars Wendler: > > Oh, and to all new team members: > Please keep in mind to *not* use EAPI-6 for base-system packages yet, so > we can retain a somewhat stable upgrade path even for very old systems. > That won't help anyone with upgrading. Large

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: kde-apps/libkdeedu

# Michael Palimaka (24 Aug 2016) # No longer produced by upstream and no longer used by anything. # Masked for removal in 30 days. kde-apps/libkdeedu