Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January

2006-01-02 Thread Grobian
On 02-01-2006 20:03:54 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote: On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 12:50 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote: I guess I'm almost hinting at that Gentoo needs a single entity that's sole purpose is to drive/research the direction and goals for Gentoo. Or call it proper hierarchy. Management.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January

2006-01-02 Thread Grobian
On 02-01-2006 21:12:03 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote: If it isn't one person, then you would need to find two persons or even more that are completely aligned and have the same visions. Since leaders usually are charismatic and controversial where necessary to achieve their goals, it is hard

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: regular project updates

2006-01-05 Thread Grobian
On 05-01-2006 17:00:15 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote: So - as GWN monkey - I'm offering my services as aggregator for project updates. Maybe someone from the doc project wants to help to get this information put on the website so that it's visible? The following crossed my mind: what about a

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: regular project updates

2006-01-05 Thread Grobian
On 05-01-2006 16:41:12 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:28:13 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I'm thinking of quite dull news, so absolutely not meant to be a | publication like GWN, but just thingis like some commits on the | portage sources that say to fix

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January

2006-01-06 Thread Grobian
You better bring this up on the gentoo-alt mailing list. Please consider posting it there instead of going in a private discussion. On 06-01-2006 08:15:42 -0700, Duncan wrote: And I definitely wish you well in your G/FBSD efforts, but when I mentioned them on my local ISP's unix (*ix) group,

Re: [gentoo-dev] sed vs gsed

2006-01-25 Thread Grobian
On 25-01-2006 09:19:44 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: On Wednesday 25 January 2006 06:47, Mike Frysinger wrote: Diego was mistaken here ... probably my fault because i lied to him at some point on irc, who knows for sure ... at any rate, the sed ebuild does not install 'gsed' on

[gentoo-dev] RFC: tcsh vs. csh, removal of the latter

2006-01-25 Thread Grobian
Hi all, We currently have both tcsh and csh in the tree. For those who don't know what they are: they are shells. tcsh is the more sophisticated little brother of csh. Their relationship is roughly comparable to the relationshop between bash and sh shells. Like bash and sh, tcsh is able to

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: tcsh vs. csh, removal of the latter

2006-01-25 Thread Grobian
On 25-01-2006 16:19:54 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Wednesday 25 January 2006 15:47, Stuart Herbert wrote: The csh package currently has a maintainer who is an active Gentoo developer; have you spoken to taviso first to find out whether he wants to remove csh from the tree? last we

Re: [gentoo-dev] coreutils: deprecated behavior not so deprecated

2006-01-29 Thread Grobian
On 27-01-2006 08:44:14 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Monday 23 January 2006 23:04, Mike Frysinger wrote: for those who dont know what i'm talking about, consider: tail -1 head -1 some other stuff i cant remember it would seem i lied about this (at least the first two still work)

[gentoo-dev] GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-09 Thread Grobian
Please find attached GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables. The GLEP is a Gentoo/Alt initiative. Constructive comments are welcome. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo/Alt GLEP: 47 Title: Creating 'safe' environment variables Version: $Revision: 1.1 $ Last-Modified: $Date: 2006/02/09 21:42:57 $

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-10 Thread Grobian
On 09-02-2006 23:50:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 22:48:32 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead of proposing a 4-tuple [3]_ keyword, a 2-tuple keyword is chosen for archs that require them. Provision should be made for future ports that require more than two

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-10 Thread Grobian
On 10-02-2006 00:38:47 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 19:26:11 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Assuming the CHOST variable is 'safe' is not a good thing, users can over-ride this variable. Can you specify some behavior when it's set to something bogus (

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-10 Thread Grobian
On 10-02-2006 11:00:33 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten wrote: On Friday 10 February 2006 09:00, Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote: Could you add a definition of 'safe' to the GLEP?  It's not clear what this means at the moment. Variables that can be counted on, as users can't change them in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-10 Thread Grobian
On 10-02-2006 01:30:40 -0700, Duncan wrote: Grobian posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:48:32 +0100: .. [3] For the purpose of readability, we will refer to 1, 2 and 4-tuples, even though tuple in itself suggest a field consisting of two values

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-10 Thread Grobian
On 10-02-2006 20:22:06 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:25:47 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On 09-02-2006 23:50:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 22:48:32 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] | wrote: | Instead of proposing a 4-tuple [3

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables

2006-02-11 Thread Grobian
On 11-02-2006 20:05:58 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 08:28:34 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | kfreebsd-gnu is, in effect, one example you're using already. You'd | have x86 as the arch, FreeBSD as the kernel and GNU as the userland. | | Yes, but you're actually

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions

2006-02-13 Thread Grobian
On 13-02-2006 21:02:28 +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote: On Monday 13 February 2006 20:29, Grobian wrote: Maybe that has to change then? Like getting more bug wranglers that also handle canned responses as a first-line helpdesk? Wrangle bugs a few months and you'll see how hard it can

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA Roles v2

2006-03-02 Thread Grobian
On 02-03-2006 20:19:19 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 21:10:02 +0100 Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I'm also convinced that deliberate circumvention is easy to detect. In that case, please provide a list of cases where !arch? flags are being used to circumvent

Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Emanuele Giaquin (exg)

2006-03-06 Thread Grobian
At last... :) Welcome Emanuele! On 06-03-2006 20:41:28 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all. Slightly late but never the less I'd like to introduce Emanuele Giaquinta (exg) who joined the team a few weeks ago. Emanuele will be working on Gentoo/OSX and ppc stuff when he's not making up

Re: [gentoo-dev] x86-fbsd keyword in main tree?

2006-03-09 Thread Grobian
On 09-03-2006 12:30:33 -0500, Alec Warner wrote: Regardless, I'd like to reach a conclusion about this, was GLEP 47 submitted to the council for the next meeting? As far as I know: no. I didn't myself because I'm having a problem with ppc-macos and the upcoming x86-macos (they will probably

Re: [gentoo-dev] Savannah CVS changes and the missing GNUStep herd

2006-03-19 Thread Grobian
Unless somebody else wants to do it, I am about to step in here to keep GNUstep in the tree. I already did some research on it, and it seems it needs an update, and the previous maintainer masked a few of the CVS ebuilds, so that eases things a bit. Seems many of the packages can use an upgrade,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Global logrotate use flag

2006-03-21 Thread Grobian
Have a look at these: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/27451 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/30090 On 21-03-2006 14:19:31 +0100, Jeroen Roovers wrote: Hi everyone, I noticed 'logrotate' is becoming quite generic as a use flag: -- Fabian Groffen --

[gentoo-dev] Gentoo wants YOU! (for GNUstep)

2006-03-25 Thread Grobian
On 19-03-2006 11:16:10 +0100, Grobian wrote: I would really like to see a new GNUstep maintainer [...] Gentoo is now officially looking for people interested to maintain, expand (*and FIX* :) ) GNUstep applications on Gentoo. We expect interested persons to be willing to maintain GNUstep

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Improving Gentoo User Relations

2006-04-07 Thread Grobian
On 07-04-2006 11:07:28 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: I mean, as a purely hypothetical example... Could you imagine just how many dumb feature requests, questions and requests for code from the unwashed masses someone would get if they admitted to having an early alpha of an alternative to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-osx] Package testing -- Automated initiative

2005-08-15 Thread Grobian
Chris Gianelloni wrote: By the way, I am working to get catalyst running on OSX, so version 2.0 will definite suit your needs when it is released. If you need help on OSX specific things, be sure to contact us... -- Fabian Groffen eBuild Porting Gentoo for Mac OS X --

Re: [gentoo-dev] generating ChangeLog files automatically from `cvs commit`

2005-08-17 Thread Grobian
Extracted from what Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: That's not a valid argument - you can use a bash function for calling echangelog and repoman as shown numerous times on this list. See my first answer (bash function). See my first answer (bash function). From a database point of view,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bugzilla handling for maintainer-wanted things

2005-08-18 Thread Grobian
Maurice van der Pot wrote: On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 09:28:47PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Bah! No I'm not, because Sven pointed out that it collides with the bugzilla resolution. So I'm going with CHECKED instead. Whoah! Isn't REVIEWED the perfect keyword? or APPROVED? -- Fabian

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Grobian
Ricardo Loureiro wrote: Usable in the way that the client machines should be able to use portage, except it's the hacked (or new package) version that should do everything from the SQL server. For example, a emerge package would behave in 2 possible ways;1- calculate it's dependencies from the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about XML files used in portage

2005-09-22 Thread Grobian
Paul de Vrieze wrote: AFAIK CDATA will be satisfied by one single space as well... One of the drawbacks of DTD's. In general schema's are better in specifying an xml format, as they allow restrictions on CDATA, and more freedom in other areas (like true order independence). Is there a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about XML files used in portage

2005-09-23 Thread Grobian
Paul de Vrieze wrote: One reason is that there still is no real agreement on what schema to support. Also when I wrote those I was more at home with DTD's than with WXS or Relaxng, and xmllint (part of libxml2) did not support WXS validation. I'll look into creating a WXS version. Is WXS

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP ??: Critical News Reporting

2005-11-04 Thread Grobian
Danny van Dyk wrote: IMHO a text based file has a big advantage in this proposed application over fileformats which use XML: Any administrator can read it with his editor of choice, right from the console. This is an important aspect for sure, but why can't such file be generated from a

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Motivation == There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, none of them particularly effective: This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something which you don't prove or give any reason for. Hence it's eligable for

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Jan Kundrát wrote: On Saturday 05 of November 2005 11:28 Grobian wrote: Remember that it is easy to say here that users don't read what's on their consoles as well, as in post emerge messages etc. So make sure you deal with it upfront, why you think now it *will* work. Emerge messages

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fault us for not trying to get the news of config changes out to all

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we were only aiming at a certain group of people there would be no need to change anything. The apache announcements reached lots of users but still left a large chunk of users in the dark. Moving the news to -announce or some RSS feed wouldn't change anything as the

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Bryan ��� wrote: Even if you don't realise that this will be a big help for many users or you just don't think those users deserver any help (not sure which one it is tbh) - you might at least consider the fact that only having to push news about major / critical

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-05 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Apart from that this point seems to repeat much of the previous one, | it introduces a new unfounded claim (users do read, but now too late) Read the linked forums thread and all will become clear. the forums thread advocates against the new unfounded claim, IMHO. |

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-06 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Which means you won't be able to satisfy your preemptive | requirement. Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point when trying to warn them any further becomes futile. Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people through

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Grobian
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:56:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people | through existing intrastructure, which is cheap from an engineering | perspective because everything is already there in place, and don't | think of implementing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Grobian
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:32:38 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | So, what list should the user that wants to receive those | **important** messages sign up to? That's your first misconception right there. Most users don't sign up for things. Doesn't matter

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-07 Thread Grobian
Daniel Ostrow wrote: You are correct, there is no clear cut place for them to go...that's how this thing got started in the first place. However why force users to sign up for something which can't be appropriately filtered (installed packages, keywords, use flags, profiles, etc.) when all of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Grobian
On 10-11-2005 20:55:37 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: Ok, you want a reaction, because you are Feeling Blue[1], right. On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 20:11 +0100, Grobian wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: That's your first misconception right there. Most users don't sign up for things. Doesn't

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Grobian
On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't do that if we simultaneously launch several sources of news all at once. We have to launch *one* service first, give the userbase time to adjust to that, and then start making

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-11 Thread Grobian
On 11-11-2005 10:38:43 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote: No, the central repository certainly shouldn't be on the web (whatever that means in the first place), it has to be somewhere in CVS (easily accessible by all devs, though not necessarily in a direct way) and should be replicated to as many

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-12 Thread Grobian
Stuart Herbert wrote: On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only* delivered by portage. I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I support making the news available via other ways. It's the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: GLEP 42 Critical News Reporting Round Two

2005-11-12 Thread Grobian
Jason Stubbs wrote: To be honest, this is the part that I don't like the most. Integrating code into portage to copy files here and there based on some predefined rules and news readers reading and renaming files based on some predefined rules... A filesystem based API just doesn't seem very

Re: [gentoo-dev] Modular X porting: dependency changes

2005-11-22 Thread Grobian
On 21-11-2005 19:15:58 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote: | virtual/x11 isn't xorg for all profiles. Perhaps the relevant people (macos?) could get in touch with me, and we can figure out what needs to happen. It may be that we'll need to add x11-base/apple-xfree into the || list as well.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Maintainer's guides?

2005-11-24 Thread Grobian
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: On Thursday 24 November 2005 21:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: *shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of handling developer documentation. If it's just matter of fixing the English in it, I don't think there's much technical matter they

Re: [gentoo-dev] Update of http://wwwredesign.gentoo.org

2005-11-25 Thread Grobian
menus (Documentation, Resources and Community). The text now looks vertically misaligned to me in the tabs-bar and footer, in comparison how it was before the font size change. I could live with it. Here are some screenies of the font-sizes: http://dev.gentoo.org/~grobian/Afbeelding%204.png http

Re: [gentoo-dev] Misquoted in the GWN

2005-11-28 Thread Grobian
On 28-11-2005 18:54:14 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:46:57 +0100 Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | | A friend of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Allow upstream tags in metadata.xml

2005-12-27 Thread Grobian
On 26-12-2005 22:11:46 -0200, Marcelo Ges wrote: Fellow Gentooers, Here is a draft of an enhancement proposal that should allow upstream information to be included in metadata.xml: http://dev.gentoo.org/~vanquirius/glep-0099.txt using http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0046.html The

Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLogs and rsync time

2006-01-01 Thread Grobian
On 01-01-2006 21:35:34 +0100, Francesco Riosa wrote with possible deletions: The information contained in the ChangeLogs is essential, and it must be kept, but, force the users to download all that data it's not optimal. That said I can see only two ways to reduce the ChangeLog files (a