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

2006-01-06 Thread Marius Mauch
Lance Albertson wrote: I never meant that each subproject can't have their own goals. They need to have those of course! I was more directed that there isn't a person in charge of all the subprojects just to keep track of them (Not governing them). i.e. if subproject foo is working on adding

Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and simple guides

2006-01-08 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 18:59:40 +0100 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I originally thought of putting it on my devspace, but using GuideXML there is a bit tricky, at least for me (as xsltproc seems to refuse working on the pure xml directly). So I was thinking if we had a way

[gentoo-dev] sqlite3 use flags

2006-01-17 Thread Marius Mauch
On a similar matter as the pdf use flags, just noticed that there are six local sqlite3 use flags, all with the same meaning. So instead of adding another one I'll make this a global one later today. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was

Re: [gentoo-dev] pdf use flags

2006-01-17 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:54:49 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Checking for pdf use flags I just found that there are currently at least three different flags for pdf stuff in the tree: - pdflib (global) - cpdflib (global) - pdf (several local ones) Just found another local one

Re: [gentoo-dev] fix binary debug support, part elevenity billion 1/2

2006-01-21 Thread Marius Mauch
Mike Frysinger wrote: On Sunday 15 January 2006 01:11, Mike Frysinger wrote: - we add an emerge flag (say '--debug-build') which adds debug-build to FEATURES IMO this is pointless and redundant. But otherwise the proposal looks good. Marius -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Manifest2 format

2006-01-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:04:53 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html This will NOT be voted upon the next council meeting on thursday ;) Ok, made a few minor corrections, mainly s

Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask cleanups

2006-01-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 09:17:24 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I figured it was time for a bit of cleaning... I ended up writing a really crappy script for stable to do a check of whether package.mask entries were really referencing

Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask cleanups

2006-01-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:45:40 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was attempting to be helpful and filter out valid packages from the list. I could have been an ass and been like Yo I think package.mask is bloated go clean it and not given a list at all, but that is not very useful.

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: emerge snapshots

2006-01-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:12:38 +0900 Kalin KOZHUHAROV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all. During the last many months, more than once an idea occured in my mind, so I decided to share it. 2006-01-25T01:34 kalin $ dd if=/dev/brain of=gentoo-dev bs=1 count=3292 Do you think it will be good

Re: [gentoo-dev] Removal of auto-use in portage-2.0.54

2006-01-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 17:12:45 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, As I said earlier, we'd like to get rid of the nasty auto-use feature, including the support for the USE_ORDER variable. Right now we intend this for 2.0.54 (might not be the final version number) unless

Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X

2006-01-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:32:00 -0800 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark Loeser wrote: On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:06:12 -0800 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's wrong with the original idea of just making any unported ebuild pull in all of modular X (minus drivers)? Yes,

[gentoo-dev] [RFC] making the tree depend on portage

2006-01-25 Thread Marius Mauch
Sent this to -portage-dev [1] last month with little feedback on the idea itself, so starting another try. From: Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [RFC] making the tree depend

Re: [gentoo-dev] bootstrapping since gcc 3.4 is stable

2006-01-25 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 17:23:20 +0100 Sven Köhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to see, that bootstrap.sh unmerges any old gcc (emerge -C \${gcc package that we just compiled}) that's a bad idea imo let the user decide which gcc they wish to have But doesn't bootstrap.sh rebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Manifest2 format

2006-02-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:27:56 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:04:53 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html This will NOT be voted upon

Re: [gentoo-dev] Request for Comment

2006-02-11 Thread Marius Mauch
Klaus-J. Wolf wrote: Hi, I am new to this list, but I am not new to Gentoo. Would you please discuss a GLEP draft, which I believe it might improve the usability of Gentoo? Text at: http://www.seismic.de/gentoo/gentoo_mask_proposal.html Technical details still missing... Ignoring the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc

2006-02-12 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 17:49:26 +0100 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: R Hill wrote: a global USE flag duplicated in use.local.desc could be used to give specific information about exactly what effect the flag has on a certain package, or if for some reason it does differ slightly

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Duplicated entries in use.desc and use.local.desc

2006-02-12 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 14:49:55 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: IIRC the idea behind duplication was not to use a flag for different purposes, but have a generic description in use.desc (like doc: build additional docs) and give a more detailed

Re: [gentoo-dev] SRC_URI component naming collision

2006-02-28 Thread Marius Mauch
Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Sunday 26 February 2006 22:29, Robin H. Johnson wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 02:19:40PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Side note: if the packages in question are fetch restricted, you're screwed, and will not be able to add them to the tree. Actually, there is a

Re: [gentoo-dev] glep 0042 (news) final draft

2006-03-03 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 00:19:47 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Attached is the final draft. No substantial changes since last time, just wording cleanups and a few clarifications. You'll be able to see it here in an hour or three (check the dates!):

Re: [gentoo-dev] glep 0042 (news) final draft

2006-03-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 18:05:35 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 4 Mar 2006 05:20:06 + Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | * Portage must extend portageq to implement a command which | returns whether or not the profile used for a given repository ID | matches

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo on VMWare - few ideas

2006-03-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 16:32:55 +0900 Kalin KOZHUHAROV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is it worth: For windoze people it will be a great way to experience/play with Gentoo Where is the big difference to booting a livecd in vmware? Ok, you can write to the disk (image), but I don't

Re: [gentoo-dev] New Glep 46 Draft: Allow upstream tags in metadata.xml

2006-03-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 5 Mar 2006 15:29:58 -0300 Marcelo Góes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I am basically mailing this new draft on behalf of Ciaran, I just ok'd it :-). Please read and comment. general comment: Maybe this is an imlementation thing, but it would be good to list the actual DTD for the

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

2006-04-03 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:38:48 -0400 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: dont get me wrong, i hate documenting common sense as much as the next sane guy, but it seems Gentoo has come to the point where this needs to be done many thanks to the Ubuntu guys and to solar for doing the real

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Google Summer of Code and Gentoo

2006-04-16 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 17:39:14 -0400 Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Alec Warner wrote: always portage portage portage. :) Can't you people think of another project to pick on^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H that needs help? What about a Gentoo stats? Hmm, maybe the server component could be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union

2006-04-28 Thread Marius Mauch
Grant Goodyear schrieb: Some questions that need to be answered: * Can the repo be converted while maintaining the history? * How long does a full checkout take? * How much disk space does a full checkout require? * Is there a viewcvs equivalent available? * Others that I can't think of

Re: [gentoo-dev] coldplug and hotplug

2006-05-03 Thread Marius Mauch
Jakub Moc schrieb: Well, it should not be loaded first of all... Hence why I want to have an ability to turn off the coldplug thing *completely* on udev level. I don't have any use for such automagic stuff, it just complicates things instead of making them easier. Well said. Marius --

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: When will KDE 3.5 be marked as stable?

2006-05-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 04 May 2006 16:29:56 -0700 Michael Kirkland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would suggest opening a middle ground tag, where things can be moved to from ~arch when they work for reasonable configuration values, but still have open bugs for some people. More work for devs, yay!/sarcasm

Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles

2006-05-16 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 16 May 2006 16:15:49 +0100 Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If noone has any strong reasonable objections, I'd like to add a Paludis profile to the tree. This would use Paludis as the default provider for virtual/portage (which is a less than ideal name, but that is another

Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles

2006-05-18 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 18 May 2006 11:44:40 -0500 Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | 4) Will Paludis ever become a Gentoo Project? Pretty unlikely, past events considered. Personally I kind of like having commit access to my own code... I thought we (Gentoo) already

Re: [gentoo-dev] Signing everything, for fun and for profit

2006-05-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 19 May 2006 15:13:15 +0100 Chris Bainbridge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: find /usr/portage -path '/usr/portage/metadata' -prune -o -path '/usr/portage/distfiles' -prune -o -path '/usr/portage/packages' -prune -o -type f -exec cat {} /tmp/blah \; time gpg --detach-sign -a /tmp/blah I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: et_EE locale and language of error messages

2006-05-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 19 May 2006 15:13:48 +0200 Stefan Schweizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marc Hildebrand wrote: Otoh LC_ALL=C could help if you intend to use a .utf-8 locale as root, though. So if it does help solving bugs and causes no trouble, why not. ok, we have prepared a patch now, so

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Signing everything, for fun and for profit

2006-05-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 19 May 2006 12:28:04 -0400 Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who signs the Manifests? Why are some unsigned? Is there a single Gentoo Security Key (like I know Slackware has and some other distros to ensure the authenticity of their files)? Because the whole signing stuff isn't official,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Signing everything, for fun and for profit

2006-05-19 Thread Marius Mauch
Disclaimer: I'll only targeting technical aspects here, I won't go into any security analysis. On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:45:17 +0200 Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3) Manifest / Manifest2 This is an implementation of a checksum / signature scheme. It is described in GLEP 44:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: et_EE locale and language of error messages

2006-05-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 19 May 2006 19:27:18 +0200 Stefan Schweizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also I would want to have it in the stable branch anyway because of bugreports by first-time users who do not use the latest version of portage. It is better to add it now while in pre-release phase than after that

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: GLEP 49 - Package manager requirements

2006-05-20 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 20 May 2006 15:41:37 +0100 Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The primary package manager is the package manager that sets the standards for the tree. All ebuilds in the tree must function with the primary package manager. As the primary package manager sets the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Glep 49 (g2boojum's version)

2006-06-02 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 16:17:06 + Ferris McCormick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Grant, Apologies; I can't find your note from yesterday, so I can't respond to the correct topic. One question just occurred to me; if it's been addressed before, apologies about that, too. Your requirement

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

2006-06-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:11:50 +0200 Jan Kundrát [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: b) Localization of Gentoo-developed applications (portage, gentoolkit,...) including their manpages I don't really like this one. Documentation, sure, but for the tools themselves I think it could cause more problems than

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

2006-06-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:00:43 +0200 Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 11:37 -0400, Alec Warner wrote: Have the GWN posted to -core in a sane time period prior to it's release. I seriously doubt anyone cares about whether the publication is always on time

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

2006-06-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:37:15 +0200 Markus Ullmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should satisfy all involved parties here. This should adress dostrow's demands as well.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

2006-06-11 Thread Marius Mauch
Stefan Schweizer schrieb: Marius Mauch wrote: On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:37:15 +0200 Markus Ullmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should satisfy all involved parties here

Re: [gentoo-dev] backups: remove Portage cruft?

2006-06-12 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:06:01 -0700 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 03:41:56PM -0500, Mike Doty wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Molle Bestefich wrote: Hi Portage takes up a lot of space and time when doing server

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 (News) revisited

2006-06-12 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:26:18 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen Bennett wrote: * Portage must provide a way for external programs to obtain a list of all repository identifiers for a given system. It is assumed that this will be in the form of a ``portageq`` command (e.g.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Defining the Tree: a proto-GLEP.

2006-06-12 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 00:00:43 +0100 Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My current idea is to draw up a formal specification of what ebuilds are allowed to do, and what to assume about the environment in which they run, as well as defining the formats of everything under profiles/,

Re: [gentoo-dev] GWN Comments

2006-06-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:00:19 +0200 Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 07:37 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote: I'd like to propose some form of ability to post user comments to GWN stories. I suppose a full blown CMS system would work, (Ab)using a blog for that might work

Re: [gentoo-dev] Qt use flag recap

2006-06-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 07:56:00 -0400 (EDT) Caleb Tennis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suppose I'm not really big on one versus the other. I was for #1 simply because it required the least amount of effort to implement, however the people who are in favor of #2 have volunteered to do the work to

Re: [gentoo-dev] pkg_nofetch: $A vs. $SRC_URI

2006-07-05 Thread Marius Mauch
Zac Medico schrieb: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Robin H. Johnson wrote: When FEATURES=mirror, and you try to fetch, it does indeed contain unevaluated USE flags. However for FEATURES=-mirror, the content of it is correct - no USE flags at all. Are you sure about the SRC_URI

Re: [gentoo-dev] pkg_nofetch: $A vs. $SRC_URI

2006-07-05 Thread Marius Mauch
Zac Medico schrieb: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: Zac Medico schrieb: If a version of SRC_URI that has all the conditionals evaluated is needed in the ebuild environment, then I think we should use a new variable name. Otherwise, it's ambiguous. Doesn't

[gentoo-dev] Replacing einfo with elog

2006-07-06 Thread Marius Mauch
For the impatient reader: Ebuilds should stop using einfo() for important messages and use elog() instead. Rationale: I assume most of you are already aware of the new elog framework in portage-2.1 for handling ebuild messages (like sending them by mail/syslog or just storing them for later

Re: [gentoo-dev] Replacing einfo with elog

2006-07-06 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 23:51:09 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A few minutes ago I committed the attached patch to base/profile.bashrc so this is no longer an issue (for 2.0 users elog is merely an alias to einfo). *sigh*, gotta get rid of this attachment-eating gremlin someday

Re: [gentoo-dev] Replacing cpu-feature USE flags

2006-07-07 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 07 Jul 2006 13:13:09 +0200 Simon Stelling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Curtis Napier wrote: I could find a million threads in the forums supporting what Ciaran is saying here. We have been told over and over and over until my head feels bashed in that MMX/SSE, etc... are NOT TO BE PUT

[gentoo-dev] atom matching behavior

2006-08-02 Thread Marius Mauch
Repost from gentoo-portage-dev[1]: Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't work as I thought, as for example =foo-1.2* matches foo-1.20 as well as foo-1.2.3. This wouldn't be a bug problem if it could be used as a general glob operator like with =foo-1.2.*, but it's use is

Re: [gentoo-dev] atom matching behavior

2006-08-03 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 16:59:01 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 07:07:35 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | * means match any version of the package so long as the specified | base is matched | | can be read both ways. | | Opinions? Oooh! I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Make FEATURES=test the default

2006-08-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 13:14:17 +0200 Sascha Geschwandtner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So right now, I'd like to see collision-protect sandbox strict included in the default FEATUREs. sandbox and strict are already default for a long time. Marius -- Public Key at

Re: [gentoo-dev] Make FEATURES=test the default

2006-08-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 09:29:48 -0400 Stephen P. Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 13:14:17 +0200 Sascha Geschwandtner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So right now, I'd like to see collision-protect sandbox strict included in the default FEATUREs

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for advanced useflag-syntax

2006-08-07 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 7 Aug 2006 15:26:44 +0200 Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Noack, Sebastian [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: snip Hey, come on. We're not Debian! Unnecessary and senseless splitting of packages is against the philosophy of Gentoo. I don't think we are not xyz is a good

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: multiple inheritance support for profiles

2006-08-13 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 13:01:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zac Medico wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Brian Harring wrote: Said single inheritance protection was added 06/05/06 (rev 3544), stabled for x86 roughly 06/22/06. Hasn't even yet made

Re: [gentoo-dev] User support system [WAS: Sunrise contemplations]

2006-08-17 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:11:24 +0200 Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: You should look for existing tools which could be enhanced before suggesting a new one. `bugz post` (from www-client/pybugz) allows you to submit a new bug report from the

Re: [gentoo-dev] writing net.xx style init script

2006-08-20 Thread Marius Mauch
paul kölle schrieb: Hi all, I need to write an init-script for multiple instances of the same service with different configurations (need to start/stop them individually) similar to what the net.xx scripts do. I thought I could get the instance name from $0 and use it as a key to look up the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo-Status

2006-08-22 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:56:11 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It has been noted that certain projects do not communicate their activities well. Many projects provide documentation for things(java), provide status updates on things(ppc), have bits in the gwn (x86,userrel,amd64),

Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet

2006-08-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:53:32 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lance Albertson wrote: I thought of that while I was walking to a meeting..heh Basically, Appoint two people to co-lead, or appoint one Lead and one Vice Lead. That way there's some kind of accountability

Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet

2006-08-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:15:18 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:53:32 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lance Albertson wrote: I thought of that while I was walking to a meeting..heh Basically, Appoint

Re: [gentoo-dev] Democracy: No silver bullet

2006-08-24 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:46:12 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:15:18 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:53:32 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP updates

2006-09-21 Thread Marius Mauch
Sorry for the late reply, had some problem with my mail setup recently. On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 22:53:44 -0500 Grant Goodyear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks to atarus, I've updated a number of GLEPs: 40 (arch teams) Now marked Final 44 (manifest2)Now marked Final I wouldn't consider

[gentoo-dev] Notification about MD5 support

2006-09-21 Thread Marius Mauch
Ferringb recently told me that this info apparently wasn't mentioned explicit enough in Glep 44: Manifest2 records do not contain a MD5 checksum. The only guaranteed checksum type there is SHA1. So once manifest1 is phased out the tree will not contain MD5 checksums anymore. This is just a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Profile masking and profiles package.mask

2006-09-30 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 06:40:07 +0200 Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a discussion to follow up bug #149508 [1]. The bug points to a behaviour change in handling of the profiles file, that, in my opinion at least, needs to be discussed, as there are profiles relying

Re: [gentoo-dev] controlling src_test

2007-10-04 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:50:01 -0600 Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are several packages in portage (and even in base-system) that fail in src_test when userpriv/usersandbox is enabled or disabled. That is, some testsuites fail when run as root and some fail if not run as root. I'd

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Planning for the transition to EAPI=1 support

2007-10-04 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 23:34:14 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu, 04 Oct 2007 15:12:29 -0700: Due to popular demand, I'm preparing a sys-apps/portage-2.1.3.12 release that will have support for EAPI=1.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Planning for the transition to EAPI=1 support

2007-10-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 12:01:56 +0200 Bo Ørsted Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 05 October 2007 04:26:50 Marius Mauch wrote: Problem is that nobody feels responsible for eselect anymore, so nobody takes care of bug #179064 (and I'm not going to play catchup games with externally

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: use flags - use options

2007-10-07 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 21:12:25 +0200 Tobias Klausmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! On Sun, 07 Oct 2007, Christian Faulhammer wrote: Marijn Schouten (hkBst) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I imagine there are a lot more cases where the simple on/off system we have now is suboptimal. I could be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: use flags - use options

2007-10-08 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:45:04 +0200 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: Marijn Schouten (hkBst) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I imagine there are a lot more cases where the simple on/off system we have now is suboptimal

Re: [gentoo-dev] Getting rid of lurking no* USE flags - profile-based package.use

2007-10-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:16:03 +0200 Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/10/07, Zac Medico [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think it's OK to start using package.use now considering that package.use has been supported since portage-2.1.2 and that's been stable since February. There are

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming masking of dev-lang/php-4* and packages depending on it

2007-10-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 15:13:49 +0200 Christian Hoffmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Heya, I'm going to p.mask =dev-lang/php-4* and all packages explicitly depending on this version of php (i.e. the whole dev-php4/ category (36 packages) and one webapp, www-apps/knowledgetree, bug 194894 [1])

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-libs/qof: qof-0.7.2.ebuild metadata.xml ChangeLog Manifest

2007-10-16 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:44:37 +0200 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007-10-16 00:21 Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] napisał(a): On 21:28 Mon 15 Oct , Christian Faulhammer (opfer) wrote: src_compile() { econf || die econf failed emake ||

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-php5/onphp: ChangeLog onphp-0.10.6.ebuild onphp-0.10.4.ebuild onphp-0.10.3.ebuild

2007-10-18 Thread Marius Mauch
Is it just me, or has this thread gone beyond it's usefulness? IOW, I think you two should take this (and future bash vs. sh discussions) to a private channel. Marius -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: repoman - I cannot handle it...

2007-10-21 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:44:46 +0100 Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Markus Rothe wrote: Attached are the scripts I use to commit packages stable/unstable. Somewhere must be a bug! 'name_split.cpp' splits a package name like sys-devel/gcc-4.1.2 into category, package name and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: repoman - I cannot handle it...

2007-10-21 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 23:13:58 +0100 Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: But like name_splitted.cpp is buggy as it assumes that a dash followed by a digit starts the version part. See echo ${PORTDIR}/*-*/* | tr ' ' '\n' | grep '\-[[:digit:]]' for some names that break

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in profiles/updates: 4Q-2007

2007-11-06 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 11:15:12 -0500 Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just to get a wider audience involved in this...this just seems wrong to do. There is a QA bug open about it as well: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198248 What are other people's feelings on using package

[gentoo-dev] New maintainers needed

2007-12-03 Thread Marius Mauch
For various reasons I can no longer maintain the following packages (in fact I haven't really maintained them for a while already), so they need a new maintainer: * app-editors/zoink - simple gtk based editor, little to no maintenance required * dev-util/gambas - Visual Basic look-alike for

Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: Request to participate in a survey for a doctoral thesis about Project Communities

2007-12-05 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:36:36 +0100 Björn Benz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://dissertation.bjoern-benz.de/output/project_community/ Thank you for your participation, a) you should probably send this to gentoo-project b) the page doesn't load for me, seems to be a redirection loop between

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI placement

2007-12-11 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:59:28 -0500 Doug Klima [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since it doesn't appear the question was answered by the last thread. I'm starting a new thread. The only sane solution I can think of is that eclasses shouldn't be allowed to change EAPI, but use conditionals to behave

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI placement

2007-12-12 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 20:00:51 -0500 Doug Klima [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When you could simply have $pkg_manager execute an eclass as 1 EAPI, another eclass as another and the ebuild as a third EAPI and simplify it for the eclass maintenance. Which doesn't work at all. Simple example would be

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI placement

2007-12-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 10:43:35 +0100 Vlastimil Babka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:14:24 +0100 Carsten Lohrke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I disagree here. It would be annoying and possibly even hindering in future not being able to use higher EAPI

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-18 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:46:12 -0700 Joe Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about storing a copy of the EAPI in the Manifest file - when ebuild ... digest is done? That way, it will always match the one authoritative post-source EAPI setting, since changing the ebuild will require a new

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-18 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:20:01 +0100 Piotr Jaroszyński [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, attaching the GLEP. most current version: http://dev.gentoo.org/~peper/glep-0055.html http://dev.gentoo.org/~peper/glep-0055.txt There is one significant problem not covered in the GLEP: If a package

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-19 Thread Marius Mauch
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:07:22 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:45:01 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is one significant problem not covered in the GLEP: If a package contains an ebuild with a suffixed extension then all developers ever

Re: EAPI definition Was: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:10:13 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, that seems a fine definition of what an eapi is. Everybody agrees on it? Nope. EAPI (from my POV) defines the API that a package manager has to export to an ebuild/eclass. That includes syntax and semantics of

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:22:22 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm thinking about having them embedded in the comment as first line as something like #!/usr/bin/env emerge --eapi $foo Unfortunately the emerge --eapi $foo part would be passed as a single argument to /usr/bin/env,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:55:06 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stuck ranges into metadata.xml for which EAPIs applied? No package manager required information can be in XML format. Says who? Us. We can change that, if we decide it's the best answer. =) Say the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Some new global USE-flags

2007-12-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 00:58:39 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:57:12 +0100 Markus Meier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: server12 See previous discussions on why this can't be global (essentially, it has different meanings for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Eclasses (Was: Re: Re: [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI) [2])

2007-12-27 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 05:21:06 + Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't see what's wrong with EAPI (if set, otherwise implicitly whatever the ebuild sets, or 0 if not set there) only applying to the file it's declared in. Because that doesn't work at all, see

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI) [2]

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:43:10 +0100 Piotr Jaroszyński [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I have updated the GLEP, hopefully it is less confusing now and hence the discussion will be more technical. Still doesn't address my concerns, namely: - silently expands the scope of EAPI beyond ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI inside ebuild filename (.EAPI-ebuild of different?)

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:50:02 +0300 Peter Volkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This hack is just to solve portage problem which does not ignore .ebuild files which does not follow pkg-ver.ebuild syntax and suggested solution is not the only solution. Other possibilities are, which I like more: 1.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EAPI definition Was: [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 23:34:44 + (UTC) Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand the ban on non-EAPI-0 features in in-tree profiles, since users could be using old PMs, but it's fine using them in /etc/portage/*, provided one has upgraded to an appropriately compatible PM, correct? Yes

Re: EAPI definition Was: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:03:12 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:26:27 +0100 Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marius Mauch wrote: Nope. EAPI (from my POV) defines the API that a package manager has to export to an ebuild/eclass. That includes

Re: EAPI definition Was: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:09:33 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:46:06 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The issue is with comparison rules. For the current use case that's not an issue as it's simply a superset, so we could just use the new

Re: [gentoo-dev] [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI) [2]

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:40:57 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:33:51 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - silently expands the scope of EAPI beyond ebuild contents (which is a blocker for me) That already happened with EAPI 1 and slot deps

Re: [gentoo-dev] USE flag documentation

2007-12-31 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 18:55:10 +0100 Denis Dupeyron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 31, 2007 3:30 PM, Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What benefit does use.xml have over use.desc? [...] No need to change the format of use.desc Anything that would enable us to document with more than

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Reducing the size of the system package set

2008-01-10 Thread Marius Mauch
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:42:57 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò) wrote: I already ranted about the fact that the dependency tree of our ebuilds is vastly incomplete, as many lack dependency on zlib; trying to get this fixed was impossible, as Donnie and other insisted that as

Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and subproject status

2008-01-10 Thread Marius Mauch
About portage: Current status: The portage project is mostly fine, though we've missed my original plan to release the first 2.2 test versions last year, mostly because of lack of time on my part. I hope we can fix that within the next two or three months. As Paul has already mentioned, the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Seeking questions for a user survey

2008-01-15 Thread Marius Mauch
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:33:48 -0800 Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, so per the one discussion in #-dev this evening, I'm looking for questions to put on a new user survey. For style of questions, multiple choice (both pick-one and pick-many) or simple integers would be best.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >