[gentoo-dev] Global logrotate use flag

2006-03-21 Thread Jeroen Roovers
Hi everyone, I noticed 'logrotate' is becoming quite generic as a use flag: # euses logrotate app-backup/bacula:logrotate - Install support files for logrotate mail-filter/dspam:logrotate - Install support files for logrotate net-ftp/vsftpd:logrotate - Use logrotate for rotating logs

Re: [gentoo-dev] Global logrotate use flag

2006-03-21 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 13:28:38 + Markus Rothe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/27451 I read that at the time. This is just a reminder. JeR -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] adding a code of conduct

2006-04-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 01:27:54 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i recognize i'm a bit of a dick and i'm trying to change. I'll use this opportunity to add that your efforts are not going unnoticed. Thanks. Kind regards to all, JeR -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] emerge resume list

2006-04-06 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 13:52:48 +1000 evader [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I do an emerge -e world where is the list of files to be merged stored? For example if I break an emerge, and want to resume later from a different position, can I edit the packages to be emerged list so I don't have to

Re: [gentoo-dev] seamonkey - nss vs nspr

2006-07-27 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:04:11 +0200 Martin Schlemmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyhow, that is the whole issue with mozilla stuff in general - huge hunk of code that is not really modular, and have to be rebuild for a few to many projects. While I am all for getting the POS more modular (which

Re: [gentoo-dev] Sunrise contemplations

2006-08-01 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 1 Aug 2006 10:21:53 +0200 Tobias Klausmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Idea: should it be more obvious in emerge --info and ebuild failure that an overlay is involved? If it's obvious enough, I don't see a problem. Also, a command that lists all installed packages that come from an

[gentoo-dev] RFC: AT emerge info cruft attachments on bugs.g.o

2006-08-10 Thread Jeroen Roovers
Hi everybody, I propose the `emerge --info` included in arch testers' comments on stabilisation bugs should rather be posted as attachments. The AT comments clog up the bugs and are usually not interesting at all to devs other than those who are arch devs for the relevant arches. It would

Re: [gentoo-dev] Council polls now open

2006-08-10 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:42:47 -0700 Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is the current election name that we should use when running votify? To vote, log into dev.g.o and type votify --help for instructions. Doing that explained everything. :) Kind regards, JeR --

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: AT emerge info cruft attachments on bugs.g.o

2006-08-10 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 23:58:46 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem with attachments is that processing the report takes longer - you have to go to the web to read the attachment to find out what config worked (or failed, if that was the case). It's best to have it

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: AT emerge info cruft attachments on bugs.g.o

2006-08-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:52:30 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In general it depends what you're doing. Personally I find inline emerge --info quicker to process, as I tend to do that by scrolling up and down a bug when trying to determine what triggers a bug. However that's for

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: AT emerge info cruft attachments to [STABLE] bugs

2006-08-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 15:25:11 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In order to decide to change how things are currently done, you need to show that it is better for a majority of the people affected. (N minus 1 of N arches) times (the number of arch devs minus the number of $ARCH

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: AT emerge info cruft attachments to [STABLE] bugs

2006-08-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:27:29 -0400 Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am on the alpha, amd64, and x86 arch teams. I have found that even emails from architectures I'm not currently looking at tend to have a great significance. It seems to me that most of the failures are USE-flag

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: AT emerge info cruft attachments on bugs.g.o

2006-08-12 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 13:13:48 +0200 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jeroen Roovers wrote: On a minor note, I'd also like to see bug reporters use canonical package names in bug descriptions, including the category (and preferably the specific version, not some =foo-3*!!!one

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] CFLAGS paragraph for the GWN

2006-10-01 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:23:37 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 30 Sep 2006 16:37:05 -0600: If you want flags that just break stuff with 4.1 you can include -ftree-vectorize. Could you point me at

Re: Proxy maintainers in metadata.xml (was Re: [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds)

2012-12-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:51:36 + Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: Bug-wranglers are supposed to do that by default. When you see a non-gentoo developer in metadata.xml, the default action is to assume his is the real maintainer and the bugs should be assigned to him. Such guidance

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Packages up for grabs due lavajoe retirement

2012-12-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 1 Dec 2012 21:41:35 -0500 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote: Look, if you want to make a policy about the stuff, then make a policy, get council approval, and write it down. Don't make up silly half-solutions.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Cleaning tree of outdated packages

2012-12-14 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:25:59 + Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: We also have 720 packages listed as maintainer-needed[1] meaning nobody is actually taking care of them. And this number is pretty scary. [1]http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/treecleaners/maintainer-needed.xml Why

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

2012-12-17 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:14:49 -0500 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: I face funroll-loops references and worse almost every time I bring up Gentoo among a different group of Linux-familiar technical people. There are still *very* strong prejudices against Gentoo in most places Comparing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

2012-12-18 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:40:06 +0100 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: People aren't bothering. It's not because of any fundamental problem -- it's because the process is obscure and potentially a waste of time. I agree with that. The process takes a lot of time for a minor benefit,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Attracting developers (Re: Packages up for grabs...)

2012-12-26 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 05:39:00 +1300 Kent Fredric kentfred...@gmail.com wrote: On 19/12/2012 10:03 p.m., Michał Górny wrote: If I were to throw random ideas, I'd think about letting new recruits did all commits through a proxy (mentor?). Of course, it all would be easier if we used git. For

Re: [gentoo-dev] What did we achieve in 2012? What are our resolutions for 2013?

2012-12-31 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 22:17:35 +0800 Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote: Happy New Year to all of you! +1 Looking back at 2012, I wonder what we consider our achievements for this past year. What is the state of Gentoo? How have we brought it forward and improved it this past year? I think

[gentoo-dev] Dropping keywords, again

2013-01-02 Thread Jeroen Roovers
*octave-3.6.2-r1 (11 Jun 2012) 11 Jun 2012; Sébastien Fabbro bicat...@gentoo.org +octave-3.6.2-r1.ebuild: Re-add hdf5, some octave packages might need it. Do in source configuring for preventing more bugs. Drop hppa (needs hdf5) You are supposed to[1] tell the arch team when you drop

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping keywords, again

2013-01-02 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 12:36:36 +0100 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: You are supposed to[1] tell the arch team when you drop their keyword. *PDL-2.4.11 (16 Jun 2012) 16 Jun 2012; Sébastien Fabbro bicat...@gentoo.org +PDL-2.4.11.ebuild, +files/PDL-2.4.11-fortran.patch, +files/PDL

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Wordiness

2013-01-09 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 23:33:02 -0600 Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote: On 05:31 Fri 21 Dec , Matt Turner wrote: My point is that you consistently write long essays that I, and apparently most others, don't bother to read. I'm not sure if you're aware of this. Someone said

Re: [gentoo-dev] changes to tested bugzilla keyword proposal

2013-01-09 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 9 Jan 2013 18:39:09 +0200 Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On 9 January 2013 18:17, Vicente Olivert Riera per...@carrosses.com some devs and I were talking about the fact that TESTED bugzilla keyword may need a change on his description, or, maybe it's needed to create

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] please sign your manifests

2013-02-12 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:14:15 -0600 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: All, as preparation for the up-coming cvs-git migration of the portage tree, the council is strongly suggesting that from this point forward all developers sign their manifests with their gpg key as described in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] please sign your manifests

2013-02-12 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 01:47:34 +0100 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: It would help if repoman noticed when you have FEATURES=-sign. :-\ https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=457034 jer

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] please sign your manifests

2013-02-12 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:07:33 -0800 Alec Warner anta...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 01:47:34 +0100 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: It would help if repoman noticed when you have FEATURES=-sign

Re: [gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted: x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers

2013-03-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 15:39:16 -0600 Doug Goldstein car...@gentoo.org wrote: One of the reasons people volunteer in open source projects is to scratch their personal itch. When that itch develops into a festering, gangrenous limb it becomes time to amputate it. That is what I am doing with my

Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-maintainers herd as a backup herd for all the user-maintained packages

2013-03-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 19:35:24 + Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: A number of packages in the tree are maintained by a Gentoo developer and a user. As a result of which, we are unable to monitor these packages in bugzilla. This is useful in case one of the maintainers goes MIA so

Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-maintainers herd as a backup herd for all the user-maintained packages

2013-03-05 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:09:47 + Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: If there is at least one Gentoo developer in metadata.xml we assume the package is properly maintained by him so we never touch it. Sounds fine. I for one am converted (and the packages I maintain in that fashion).

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-libs/confuse: confuse-2.7.ebuild ChangeLog

2013-03-10 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 12:44:18 +0100 Tomáš Chvátal tomas.chva...@gmail.com wrote: If I remember correctly the damn rule is to put it for 30 days into testing, and as you said there was no previous version on arm so users could've reported some issues, i agree that sometimes you have to ignore

Re: [gentoo-dev] New license: CROSSOVER-2

2013-03-28 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 17:13:03 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: I have attached [...] a diff showing the differences between the new license and the old license. diff -w helps to weed out the uninteresting whitespace changes. jer

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc: pt_chown setuid going away by default

2013-04-13 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:08:10 -0400 Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote: that you remember. i think it's more likely you copy pasted some line a long time ago than baselayout modified it for you. Exactly, but where did that come from? two people who have installs that are a decade old

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [OT/NIT] Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in profiles: ChangeLog package.mask

2013-04-23 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 21:31:10 +0200 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Just to make it clear -- there are four CVS commits. Ebuild commit followed by GPG-signed Manifest commit. Hopefully the developer has persistent SSH connections set up. AFAIK setting these up still isn't properly

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages using -Werror

2013-05-03 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800 Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote: Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code, but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from packages I maintain. That will change now, upon learning of this policy. Debian

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages using -Werror

2013-05-03 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 03 May 2013 16:15:35 +0200 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: We don't need that. I was actually firmly agreeing on that point. The question was where this was all coming from, and I was pointing out that it's regarded as inherently good elsewhere. We already get QA warnings for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-libs/id3lib: metadata.xml ChangeLog id3lib-3.8.3-r9.ebuild

2013-05-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 03 May 2013 20:18:42 +0200 Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote: + 03 May 2013; Justin Lecher j...@gentoo.org +id3lib-3.8.3-r9.ebuild, + metadata.xml: + Fix obsolete macros to work with automake-1.13, #467704; bumped to EAPI=5 and + autotools-utils.eclass There was no reason

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-libs/id3lib: metadata.xml ChangeLog id3lib-3.8.3-r9.ebuild

2013-05-05 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 04 May 2013 19:49:03 +0200 viv...@gmail.com viv...@gmail.com wrote: (Also, why do a revision bump and leave the stable revision unfixed?) but this: because automake-1.13 is _not_ stable an because there are enough changes to risk to break it? The fix changes a single line in a

Re: [gentoo-dev] OpenRC supporting systemd units

2013-05-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 8 May 2013 20:55:35 +0200 Ambroz Bizjak ambr...@gmail.com wrote: Init.d scripts are programs - they could probably do just about anything. They couldn't monitor a process and restart it when it crashes, as specified by the restart options in the unit file. That is, without

Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to normal users

2013-05-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 8 May 2013 21:48:36 -0400 Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: Wouldn't the systemd USE flag be the appropriate one to key on? The description in /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc says... systemd - Enable use of systemd-specific libraries and features like socket activation or

[gentoo-dev] robo-stable bugs

2013-05-19 Thread Jeroen Roovers
Private messages and public comments through bugzilla are so far ignored, it seems, so let's try a venue where it's sure to cause a flamewar instead. My apologies for the inconvenience. On Sat, 18 May 2013 21:08:53 + bugzilla-dae...@gentoo.org wrote: DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL. Also, do not

Re: [gentoo-dev] robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 21 May 2013 15:32:25 +0200 Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote: Automagic stabilization is a bad idea. I agree. Maintainer timeout is not a valid reason to go ahead with stabilisation. If you really want to push forward, you should be required to do more research as bug reporter. And

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 22 May 2013 09:03:43 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote: And the circle is closed since we started with the correlation no answer to stable bug in 30 days = package unmantained ;-) This could actually work Then we'd get the Ubuntu/Launchpad situation, where

Re: [gentoo-dev] robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 22 May 2013 08:53:06 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 21/05/13 07:43 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: [ Snip reasons for why opt-out is bad ] So why don't we add something to package metadata, to indicate that a package is

Re: [gentoo-dev] robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 20 May 2013 17:29:43 +0200 Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote: Also, your script does not set the STABLEREQ keyword. People are having to hunt down your robo-stabilisation requests and add it themselves. You should just do it yourself or turn your script off. Maintainer(s) and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 21 May 2013 00:46:22 + (UTC) Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote: As a user, I've understood: * Severity is something the user/filer can use. So when Chromium doesn't compile on your machine, you set it as a Blocker, and then it gets reverted to Normal because it works fine for the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 21 May 2013 18:57:20 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: Huh? The severity of the bug is it's an enhancement. The point I was making is we could improve things by a fair margin. If all stabilisation bugs had a Severity that actually reflected the severity, then I'd pay

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs

2013-05-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 22 May 2013 19:18:41 +1000 Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org wrote: A newer version of a package is usually considered to be better in some way, hence it is an enhancement. Unless it's a Blocker, of course. :) According to the bug-wrangler's own docs[1]: A stabilisation request

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: robo-stable bugs

2013-05-27 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 23 May 2013 23:40:42 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: Okay, so what are you using the STABLEREQ keyword for that you want to set it when the bug is filed but before archs are added? If you want to see only stabilization bugs you can search in the Keywording and

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: sed script redundancy

2013-06-09 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 20 May 2011 17:39:22 +0200 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: for a while now I've been wondering if all those sed scripts in all those ebuilds are really effective. This took rather long to find some spare time for. Plonk the attached bash script into /etc/portage/bashrc.d (which

[gentoo-dev] Patches on bug reports: thanks but no thanks for the credit

2013-07-04 Thread Jeroen Roovers
For a good while now, I have been obsoleting ebuild attachments on as yet unassigned bug reports and pasting proper unified diffs into comments. I have been doing this so that the maintainers of these ebuilds see the actual changes instead of a giant blob of code that the submitter of the ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] Temporary DevRel actions for CoC violations

2013-07-06 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:39:54 +0200 Fabio Erculiani lx...@gentoo.org wrote: The final outcome I would love to see is that everybody eventually graduates from kindergarten :-) And perhaps introduce a culture-fit score in the recruiting, mentoring process. Maybe we should require everyone to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Patches on bug reports: thanks but no thanks for the credit

2013-07-06 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 04 Jul 2013 09:31:35 -0700 Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote: Thank you for the extra effort. I appreciate it, although for the one I had recently, it made it harder. I had just migrated the ebuild to the new python eclasses. So the diff included the reversal of those changes too.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] default bashrc value suggestion

2013-07-27 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 16:09:20 +0400 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name wrote: What about adding export LC_ALL=POSIX (or, at least, LC_MESSAGES) [...] We've been over this plenty of times in the past. Notably in March 2009, July 2010 (about python specific build issues), April 2011,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] default bashrc value suggestion

2013-07-27 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 18:36:26 +0400 Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name wrote: Unfortunately, gentoo.org's archive seems to be broken/frozen, while it is a bit hard to grep 3party archives to find already discussed topics :-/ Please reply below the quoted text. 27.07.2013 18:31, Jeroen

Re: [gentoo-dev] s/disk space/drive space

2013-07-30 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:53:11 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:40 AM, viv...@gmail.com viv...@gmail.com wrote: does storage space make everyone happy? rich0 is confused and looks over at the storage space he keeps his bicycles in... So what colour

Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding ABI_MIPS USE_EXPAND

2013-07-31 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 09:04:56 -0700 Matt Turner matts...@gentoo.org wrote: I committed it last night before your email. # Keep it sorted. Please do not add anything without prior discussion # on gentoo-dev. n32 n64 o32 This is not a valid format for a .desc file. You should use: flag -

Re: [gentoo-dev] USE flag descriptions

2013-08-06 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 13:57:55 +0200 Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote: Currently, USE flag descriptions are a mix of imperative (Enable) and indicative (Enables) forms, the former occuring more often: Enable : Enables = 2143 : 408 Add : Adds = 525 : 341 Build :

[gentoo-dev] Response to a friendly note about changing bug reports

2013-08-06 Thread Jeroen Roovers
23:37:25 willikins rej, you have notes! [21:13] mrueg Let me rephrase this: Just a friendly notice to please refrain from rephrasing bug summaries from Stabilize ${P} to ${P} stable req. This just adds unneeded noise to the bug. I don't want this on bugs I've reported or am assigned to. This is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Response to a friendly note about changing bug reports

2013-08-07 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 07 Aug 2013 19:07:55 +0200 Manuel Rüger mr...@gentoo.org wrote: [...] I appreciate the kinder tone. first of all I welcome and appreciate the work all members of the other bug wranglers project[1] and you do. This is where you start to slip. I am not just a bug wrangler. - I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Response to a friendly note about changing bug reports

2013-08-07 Thread Jeroen Roovers
your mistakes, whether trivial or indeed grave (see below). Oh, and now we can't do anything without an existing policy? Good thing you decided to grace this project with your attention, or we wouldn't get anything done, like: Jeroen Roovers 2013-08-06 12:46:43 UTC Summary: Stabilize net-print

Re: [gentoo-dev] news item: Language of compiler messages etc. in build logs

2013-08-14 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 22:59:49 +0200 Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote: anymore but default to English. The intention behind this is to intention behind this is = rationale is have a hard time analyzing localized builds. analyzing localized builds = reading build logs in foreign

Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving more arches to dev profiles

2013-08-24 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 12:28:24 +0100 Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: Wow! That is something we actively encourage people to avoid. Mixed systems are totally unsupported and I am sure quite a few bugs are closed as invalid when a mixed system is detected. Mixing stable and testing is

Re: [gentoo-dev] What to do with people who use internal eclass functions?

2013-08-26 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:38:04 +0200 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: I've noticed that some people are using internal eclass functions in their ebuilds. [...] What should I do to them? File a bug report. Don't do anything to anyone. jer

How to find a mentor, WAS: [gentoo-dev] rfc: stabilization policies

2013-08-31 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 31 Aug 2013 12:37:58 -0400 Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote: I know we are a little OT here but the fifth type of recruit is Yes. someone who is very excited, very dedicated, and completely unable to find a mentor. That is where I was for a long time, no one

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Improve the security of the default profile

2013-09-10 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 8 Sep 2013 18:06:56 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: So does anyone have any objections to making -fstack-protector the default? Now is the time to speak up. On PARISC you get plenty of warning of how well it's going to work out: (cc1|gcc|foo): warning: -fstack-protector

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [Bug 483274] app-text/poppler-0.22.5 Please stabilize

2013-09-16 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 14:41:12 +0200 Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote: Please stop pointless bugspam. Nice one. I'm all for it. I'm not sure how it applies to me, though. You could prevent getting mail like that 1) by sending comments like the above to /dev/null or 2) by writing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [Bug 483274] app-text/poppler-0.22.5 Please stabilize

2013-09-16 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 09:19:47 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: Jer - can you comment on how these changes are getting made? Is this some kind of script, or are you manually making these changes? It's a thing called editing and it is still usually done by humans (with a broad

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [Bug 483274] app-text/poppler-0.22.5 Please stabilize

2013-09-16 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 15:50:06 +0200 Dirkjan Ochtman d...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org wrote: At what point do we draw the line? Today my mailbox is full of email with changes like app-foo/bar-1.2.3: version bump -

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-misc/emelfm2: emelfm2-0.9.0.ebuild metadata.xml ChangeLog

2013-09-23 Thread Jeroen Roovers
# ChangeLog for app-misc/emelfm2 # Copyright 1999-2013 Gentoo Foundation; Distributed under the GPL v2 # $Header: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/app-misc/emelfm2/ChangeLog,v 1.56 2013/09/23 09:47:35 ssuominen Exp $ 23 Sep 2013; Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org emelfm2-0.8.1.ebuild,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Collecting opinions about GLEP 55 and alternatives

2009-02-24 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:21:23 +0200 Petteri Räty betelge...@gentoo.org wrote: Let's try something new. I would like to get opinions [...] A multitude of leaves on every branch of the tree. That could be a multiple of the current tree size - maybe talk to infra about this. It's also a multitude

Re: [gentoo-dev] headless herds

2009-03-22 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:55:38 -0600 Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: These herds have no members: ... live-cd: app-admin/pwgen app-arch/pbzip2 app-misc/livecd-tools dev-python/pyparted dev-util/catalyst media-gfx/splash-themes-livecd sys-apps/ddcxinfo-knoppix sys-apps/gli

Re: [gentoo-dev] `paludis --info' is not like `emerge --info'

2009-04-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 12:11:02 +0400 Peter Volkov p...@gentoo.org wrote: В Вск, 05/04/2009 в 22:41 +0200, Timothy Redaelli пишет: i think it's better to develop an emerge --info package It already exists. But regretfully it does not provide useful output even about the package's USE flags

Re: versionator.eclass terminator, was [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 55 updated

2009-05-18 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 18 May 2009 16:16:46 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote: Why do you think I wrote the awful hack that is versionator? Why don't you explain why, historically, you put that in the tree? It would help us now if you were to simply record your mistakes for everybody

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo Council Reminder for May 28

2009-05-27 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 28 May 2009 00:45:18 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote: On Wed, 27 May 2009 23:26:25 + (UTC) Mark Bateman coul...@soon.com wrote: NOT once within GLEP55 [...] Not once has there been an equally good alternative proposed. None needed, seems to be the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo Council Reminder for May 28

2009-05-27 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 28 May 2009 00:54:40 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote: None needed, seems to be the major voice. So it's your opinion that Gentoo should go with an in every way inferior solution that doesn't solve the problem as well? I was merely overstating the obvious.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Versioned use flags and preferencing (eg. qt3 / qt4 on same package)

2009-06-15 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:48:03 +0100 AllenJB gentoo-li...@allenjb.me.uk wrote: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=274197 The above bug brings up 2 issues: First, hplip says one thing, but does another with qt3 and qt4 use-based dependencies. This is obviously a bug that needs to be

Re: [gentoo-dev] 2009 Council Elections

2009-06-26 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:50:22 +1200 Alistair Bush ali_b...@gentoo.org wrote: I would believe that recent history would show the opposite. There seem to be a group of developers at which the mere mention of ciaranm results in setting them off. Regardless of the technical merits of a solution

Re: [gentoo-dev] A Little Council Reform Anyone?

2009-07-01 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:33:52 -0700 Ned Ludd so...@gentoo.org wrote: huge fscking snip Thank you. You were top of my list and I am counting on you. :) Regards, jer

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Qt3 deprecation

2009-09-01 Thread Jeroen Roovers
Qt3 deprecation is now tracked in bug #283429 [1] Regards, jer [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/283429

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: gentoo-x86 commit in net-mail/getmail: ChangeLog getmail-4.9.2.ebuild

2009-10-13 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:22:13 +0200 Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote: We are working on a proper explanation targetted to devs of this. I'm sorry for the inconvenience caused. How large of a change to the tree will this involve? Is it a small number of packages that need to be fixed

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc-0.5.1 arrived in the tree

2009-10-13 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:33:35 -0400 Mark Loeser halc...@gentoo.org wrote: I'd say this isn't correct. Unstable isn't a pure testing playground. its meant for packages that should be considered for stable. I happen to disagree. Since the advent of outside overlays and layman, we've seen many

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting desktop profile to KDE and GNOME

2009-10-25 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 09:00:03 -0500 Jeremy Olexa darks...@gentoo.org wrote: Just so it is clear and there aren't any questions in the future. The XFCE team maintains a set of recommended global use flags in our docs[1] (maintained by Josh (nightmorph)). So, whatever direction this ends up,

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA: package.mask policies

2009-11-08 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 18:24:10 +0100 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: * Masking beta... This masks are good if the software release is KNOWN to break previous behaviour or degrade user experience. Otherwise the software should not be masked (its TESTING for purpose, not stable). Also

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA: package.mask policies

2009-11-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:20:00 +0100 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: But if we look on tag of screen-4.0.3 or its release: screen-4.0.2.tar.gz27-Jan-2004 05:46 821K screen-4.0.2.tar.gz.sig27-Jan-2004 05:47 65 screen-4.0.3.tar.gz07-Aug-2008 06:30 821K

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: QA: package.mask policies

2009-11-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:11:37 +0100 Torsten Veller ml...@veller.net wrote: Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: But if we look on tag of screen-4.0.3 or its release: screen-4.0.3.tar.gz07-Aug-2008 06:30 821K screen-4.0.3.tar.gz.sig07-Aug-2008 06:30 65

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Referendum on Gentoo Foundation Inc. accepting advertising from major Gentoo Users

2009-12-02 Thread Jeroen Roovers
Neither the ballot nor the announcement contains the actual question that is to be voted on. In the case of the announcement the problem isn't as huge as with the ballot, so the latter should be fixed soon, I guess. Roy's message does mention the actual question (and I must say that it's rather

Re: [gentoo-dev] metdata.dtd should require herd/

2009-12-24 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 07:37:26 -0500 Richard Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: I think we should definitely have some way of designating which should be the contact for bugs. I've had some bugs sit around for a while without being noticed because they were assigned to the herd the package is in,

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA last rites for media-gfx/viewer

2009-12-26 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:29:39 +0100 Diego E. Pettenò flamee...@gmail.com wrote: # Diego E. Pettenò flamee...@gentoo.org (24 Dec 2009) # on behalf of QA team # # Fails to build if /usr/X11R6 is not present (bug #247737, # open November 2008). # # Removal on 2010-02-22 media-gfx/viewer

Re: [gentoo-dev] Non-free software in Gentoo

2009-12-28 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 00:36:34 -0500 Vincent Launchbury vinc...@doublecreations.com wrote: Also relating to this, what is freedist? The package app-text/dos2unix lists 'freedist' as its license, and /usr/portage/licenses/freedist says only Freely Distributable. Several other packages do this,

Re: [gentoo-dev] x11-libs/lib*: wrong RDEPENDs bug

2009-12-28 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:10:48 +0100 (CET) lx...@gentoo.org wrote: let's discuss concerns here (actually I don't see any and I am willing to fix all the ebuilds and close all my bugs if you ack). If they are genuine bugs, then there isn't anything to discuss. List of Gentoo bugs: Tracker bug

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA last rites for media-gfx/viewer

2010-01-05 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 01:33:42 +0100 Thilo Bangert bang...@gentoo.org wrote: Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org said: [snip] Feel free to CC me on bugs related to this package if you find any more pressing issues. the standard way of indicating such an interest is to add yourself

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Documentation licenses and license_groups

2010-01-05 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:00:57 -0500 Vincent Launchbury vinc...@doublecreations.com wrote: But isn't this a problem with GPL-2 and 3 also? The term GPL-compatible is too vague--which version is it referring to? For example, see http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/ again: Please note that

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Documentation licenses and license_groups

2010-01-05 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:00:57 -0500 Vincent Launchbury vinc...@doublecreations.com wrote: Duncan wrote: Quickly checking wikipedia (without verifying further), I'm probably thinking about a different license, but I had it in my head that GPLv1 had a no commercial use clause (or allowed it),

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: net-nntp/inn

2010-01-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:31:08 -0500 Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote: On Monday 11 January 2010 16:05:16 Markos Chandras wrote: # Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org (11 Jan 2010) # Fails with -Wl,--as-needed # bug #182782. Removal in 30 days net-nntp/inn is as-needed support

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: net-nntp/inn

2010-01-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:30:24 +0100 Arnaud Launay a...@launay.org wrote: But, if I understand this announce correctly, the complete inn port will be dropped to oblivion. Yes, and that shouldn't (and won't) happen. Wouldn't it be better to stabilize inn 2.5 (there's even a 2.5.1 release out

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: net-nntp/inn

2010-01-11 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:02:14 +0100 Jeroen Roovers j...@gentoo.org wrote: I'm working on getting 2.5.1 in the tree (and fixing a USE=python and some other issues while I'm at it). net-nntp/inn-2.5.1 is in the tree and fixes many (QA) issues. Please track bug #300650 [1] if you want to stay

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: net-nntp/inn

2010-01-12 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:32:06 +0200 Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: Thanks for saving this package. As Jeremy said, there is absolutely no way to measure the popularity of a package. So if it has no maintainer, and open bugs we have to mask it and announce it here. It is up to you

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: net-nntp/inn

2010-01-12 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:51:28 +0100 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org wrote: you need to fix your filter then. an open bug is not an acceptable reason for masking a package. if you're going to clean a package, you need to research actual reasons to mask punt. -mike Dont be joking,

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >