On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 16:17:04 +
Michael Everitt wrote:
> On 27/10/19 16:12, Matt Turner wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 3:06 AM James Le Cuirot wrote:
> >> On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400
> >> Joshua Kinard wrote:
> >>
> >>> Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one,
Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
---
bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 01:42:48 +
Michael Everitt wrote:
> > I agree that some rebuilds might be unnecessary, but if you don't like
> > compiling/building software Gentoo isn't for you.
> >
> > William
> >
> There's a subtle difference between compiling for compiling's sake, and
> compiling
Hello world!
toolchain@ plans to start stabilizing next major gcc version
(gcc-9) in about a week at:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/698646
Current target is =sys-devel/gcc-9.2.0-r1.
If you think your bug should be absolutely addressed before
that happens please add it as a blocker.
Also feel
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400
Joshua Kinard wrote:
> Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one, it complicates the
> kernel compiles (and it makes them bigger, something which is an issue on
> the old SGI systems at times). Two, it's another layer that I have to
> maintain.
On 10/25/2019 14:14, William Hubbs wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I have been advised to bring this topic back to the list before taking
> any action, so here it is.
>
> First, I need to clarify what I'm *NOT* talking about.
>
> This discussion has nothing to do with whether or not you have the
>
On 27/10/19 16:12, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 3:06 AM James Le Cuirot wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400
>> Joshua Kinard wrote:
>>
>>> Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one, it complicates the
>>> kernel compiles (and it makes them bigger, something
On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
>
The hacks aren't 'unnecessary'. There is a very good reason that files
that are used *purely at build time* don't land in /.
Joshua Kinard writes:
> Put simply, the kernel's single purpose, as nothing more than a
> hyper-complex while loop, is to get the hardware up into a usable state and
> then hand off to userland, then sit and service userland's needs as called
> upon. The kernel should have all of the subsystems
On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 3:06 AM James Le Cuirot wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400
> Joshua Kinard wrote:
>
> > Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one, it complicates the
> > kernel compiles (and it makes them bigger, something which is an issue on
> > the old SGI
On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 08:36:47PM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 18:55:11 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > Sure, but rebuild changes are exactly what you would want. that's how
> > software written in go gets rebuilt for example, which is exactly what
> > you want when go
On 10/27/2019 12:12, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 3:06 AM James Le Cuirot wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400
>> Joshua Kinard wrote:
>>
>>> Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one, it complicates the
>>> kernel compiles (and it makes them bigger,
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2019-10-27 23:59 UTC.
Removals:
app-office/geierlein 20191024-06:39 hannod5dda180e8f
games-fps/ut2004-action20191027-22:49 chewi9ef701d8e96
games-fps/ut2004
On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 06:58:00PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> > Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> > causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
> >
>
> The hacks aren't 'unnecessary'. There is a very
On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 13:49 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 06:58:00PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 12:40 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> > > causes unnecessary hacks in
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 12:05:02 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> If a build dep of something changes, the correct response with
> --with-bdeps=y is to rebuild everything that depends on the changed dep.
Unfortunately, my learned experience of portage is the "correct
response" is not something portage
Some messages to you could not be delivered. If you're seeing this
message it means things are back to normal, and it's merely for your
information.
Here is the list of the bounced messages:
- 89057
On 10/27/2019 06:06, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 05:38:48 -0400
> Joshua Kinard wrote:
>
>> Why do I not like an initramfs, though? Well, for one, it complicates the
>> kernel compiles (and it makes them bigger, something which is an issue on
>> the old SGI systems at times).
Other solutions offer much more features and better security, so do not
install this by default. Keep it for the moment for those who explicitely want
it.
diff --git a/eclass/qmail.eclass b/eclass/qmail.eclass
index b6ef483aa82..5a30461704e 100644
--- a/eclass/qmail.eclass
+++
On Montag, 1. April 2019 01:23:17 CET Andreas Sturmlechner wrote:
> We've had sys-auth/elogind available in Gentoo repo for quite a while now,
> and it seems to work fine for many people, as Plasma, Cinnamon, and the
> recently added Gnome support have shown.
...
> Also, with that change we can
Do not use parse_known_args to parse positional arguments, since that
causes unknown options to be handled like unknown positional arguments.
Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/673400
Signed-off-by: Zac Medico
---
lib/_emerge/main.py | 9 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Hi,
I've dropped maintainership of x11-misc/revelation (a password
manager). I'm no longer using it and it has not seen an active upstream
for some time. Compatibility issues with python components have been
fixed so the current stable version should be good to go for a bit.
Hans
signature.asc
# Michał Górny (2019-10-27)
# Unpatched privilege escalation vulnerability for over two years.
# A lot of other unresolved bugs.
# Removal in 30 days. Bug #629882.
net-analyzer/zabbix
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 18:55:11 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> Sure, but rebuild changes are exactly what you would want. that's how
> software written in go gets rebuilt for example, which is exactly what
> you want when go is upgraded.
>
> I agree that some rebuilds might be unnecessary, but if
24 matches
Mail list logo
