[gentoo-dev] Using emerge-webrsync to simplify the handbook

2012-11-28 Thread Richard Yao
We could slightly simplify the handbook installation procedure if we told people to use emerge-webrsync to fetch the initial snapshot. What do people think? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Using emerge-webrsync to simplify the handbook

2012-11-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 11/28/2012 09:17 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: We could slightly simplify the handbook installation procedure if we told people to use emerge-webrsync to fetch the initial snapshot. Using emerge-webrsync also makes

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: new eclass - pkgconfig.eclass

2012-11-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 11/28/2012 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote: On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:49:14 +0100 Justin j...@gentoo.org wrote: Hi, and another one. Problem: Some packages aren't lucky and their buildsystem doesn't create pkg-config files out of the box. Solution: Create them by hand. Result:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Using emerge-webrsync to simplify the handbook

2012-11-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 11/30/2012 06:46 AM, Sven Vermeulen wrote: On Nov 29, 2012 10:24 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: We could slightly simplify the handbook installation procedure if we told people to use emerge-webrsync to fetch the initial snapshot. What do people think? Seems a good

Re: [gentoo-dev] Using emerge-webrsync to simplify the handbook

2012-11-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 11/28/2012 11:08 AM, Matthew Thode wrote: On 11/28/2012 09:05 AM, Richard Yao wrote: On 11/28/2012 09:17 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: We could slightly simplify the handbook installation procedure if we told people to use

Re: [gentoo-dev] Using emerge-webrsync to simplify the handbook

2012-12-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 11/30/2012 01:06 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: On 30/11/12 12:30 PM, Alec Warner wrote: How about we not change the docs until someone eagerly implements all the stuff you just said? Well, using emerge-webrsync for grabbing the initial snapshot during an installation still makes sense

Re: [gentoo-dev] Using emerge-webrsync to simplify the handbook

2012-12-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 11/30/2012 12:30 PM, Alec Warner wrote: How about we not change the docs until someone eagerly implements all the stuff you just said? Note that from an infra POV our existing system works fairly well and requires no day-to-day tinkering. I'm always happy to consider new options, but

[gentoo-dev] eudev project announcement

2012-12-14 Thread Richard Yao
on further development. Ideally, eudev will be something that all distributions can use as a drop-in replacement for systemd-udevd. Yours truly, Richard Yao P.S. I have BCCed a few people that might be interested in reading the project announcement. Unfortunately, the gentoo-dev list requires

Re: [gentoo-dev] eudev project announcement

2012-12-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/14/2012 10:52 PM, Richard Yao wrote: Dear Everyone, I am pleased to announce the Gentoo eudev project. Many of you already know about the eudev project from early publicity that we had before things were ready. Despite that, I hope to take advantage of the official announcement

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/15/2012 02:33 PM, Michał Górny wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 13:58:43 -0500 Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:07:09PM +0100, Micha?? G??rny wrote Waaait, what? Did something change lately or are you just repeating the same bullshit for months? Older

Re: [gentoo-dev] eudev project announcement

2012-12-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/14/2012 11:16 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: Richard Yao wrote: Where is development now? We have rewritten the build system and restored support for older kernels and verified compatibility as far back as Linux 2.6.31. We have tagged 1_beta1 and eudev is in the portage tree. A few

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] eudev project announcement

2012-12-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/15/2012 11:20 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: Gentoo isn't GitHub. When people donate money to Gentoo they're not donating so that a club of elite coders can use the infrastructure to host just anything that suits their fancy. The reason that we let any Gentoo developer just start a project is

Re: [gentoo-dev] eudev project announcement

2012-12-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/15/2012 04:20 PM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote: Please, you have your own mailing list. Use it. -ZC I am under the impression that project announcements must be sent to gentoo-dev-announce@ and set Reply-To: gentoo-dev@. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

2012-12-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote: All, what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times that there were choices I made that are not upstream choices. If there is something I can undo in udev to make

Re: [gentoo-dev] udev distro vs upstream choices

2012-12-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/15/2012 10:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote: On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:10:22PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote: On 12/15/2012 06:02 PM, William Hubbs wrote: All, what are the specific choices I made in udev that are distro choices vs upstream choices. People have said to me a couple of times

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

2012-12-16 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/16/2012 12:20 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 12/16/2012 12:02 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: On 16-12-2012 11:57:35 -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: 3. Get off CVS for Christ's sake. Nobody wants to work with that. I don't know how this fits into my bullet list, but it's important. It

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-17 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/17/2012 05:40 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 03:17:05PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote: On 12/15/2012 02:33 PM, Michał Górny wrote: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 13:58:43 -0500 Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 07:07:09PM +0100, Micha?? G??rny wrote

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-17 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/17/2012 08:25 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:09:08PM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote: On 12/17/12 11:40 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: So systemd still works with a separate /usr and you're continuing to spread misinformation. Demonstrating such behaviour while complaining about

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-18 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/17/2012 04:31 PM, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:03:40PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote: Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:29:26AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote: As I said in an earlier email, Lennart Poettering claims that it does not work. We

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-18 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/17/2012 06:23 PM, William Hubbs wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 01:31:59PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:03:40PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote: Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:29:26AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote: As I said in an earlier email

Re: [gentoo-dev] College Course in Gentoo Development

2012-12-18 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/17/2012 10:32 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: Hi everyone, Give the talk on the list about attracting devs, I've should probably mention that I'm teaching a College Course on Gentoo Development next semester. I know two students will most likely go through the recruitment process,

Re: [gentoo-dev] College Course in Gentoo Development

2012-12-18 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/17/2012 07:46 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: 2. Write an ebuild for the project above, maintained in an overlay (also on GitHub), with sources fetched from GitHub. Add some small patch to configure.ac in the ebuild. Add USE flags. Add make check support to the build system, test with

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-18 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/18/2012 01:45 PM, William Hubbs wrote: On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:50:51AM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: On Mon, 17 Dec 2012, William Hubbs wrote: This all started with the April 2012 council meeting when it was pushed through that separate /usr without an initramfs is a supported

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-20 Thread Richard Yao
: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:03:40PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote: Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:29:26AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote: As I said in an earlier email, Lennart Poettering claims that it does not work. We are discussing some of the things necessary to make

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: eudev project announcement

2012-12-20 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/20/2012 07:02 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: No one has proposed moving everything to /usr. At the minimum, we would still have /etc and /var in /, as well as various mountpoints. If we do move those to /usr, then we

[gentoo-dev] sys-libs/glibc is subject to several out-of-tree licenses

2012-12-21 Thread Richard Yao
. There is also a license that intel-ucode, but has had the provisions changed. There are also numerous other licenses that I am seeing for the first time. Does anyone have any thoughts on how we should handle this? Yours truly, Richard Yao signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-libs/glibc is subject to several out-of-tree licenses

2012-12-21 Thread Richard Yao
On 12/21/2012 03:22 PM, Richard Yao wrote: Dear Everyone, sys-libs/glibc contains LICENSE=LGPL-2, but it would appear to be subject to roughly a dozen licenses, many of which are not in the tree? http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=LICENSES;h

Re: [gentoo-dev] Switching order of packages in virtual/pkgconfig

2013-01-04 Thread Richard Yao
On 01/03/2013 02:58 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: On 02/01/13 15:29, Luca Barbato wrote: last I checked prefix didn't have issues with the pkg-config bootstrap either. there is no circular deps either. check glib deps iirc some non-glibc platforms have few problems with it. not if you enable

Re: [gentoo-dev] Switching order of packages in virtual/pkgconfig

2013-01-04 Thread Richard Yao
On 01/04/2013 05:31 AM, Richard Yao wrote: On 01/03/2013 02:58 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: On 02/01/13 15:29, Luca Barbato wrote: last I checked prefix didn't have issues with the pkg-config bootstrap either. there is no circular deps either. check glib deps iirc some non-glibc platforms have

Re: [gentoo-dev] GCC 4.6 stabilization

2013-01-07 Thread Richard Yao
On 01/06/2013 08:22 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: This is way past due so I'd like to get 4.6 into stable. There are hardly any blockers on bug #418383 which makes me go ?!, so if anyone knows of any issues please let us know. We probably should not stabilize on ARM until the following is fixed:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Please stop useless removals

2013-02-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 02/01/2013 07:07 AM, Michael Weber wrote: On 02/01/2013 12:20 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 01/02/2013 12:11, Rich Freeman wrote: I do think it is a loss for Gentoo if we start removing packages simply because they don't change (which is all a dead upstream means - it isn't always a bad

[gentoo-dev] Re: Please stop useless removals

2013-02-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 02/01/2013 02:36 AM, Vaeth wrote: # Upstream is dead and gone. # Masked for removal on 20130302 Erm, so this is the _only_ reason - dead upstream? ++ Please, please, stop removing packages for no reason! This happens now way too often: app-dicts/ispell* app-portage/epm

[gentoo-dev] Porting ZFS to additional architectures

2013-02-05 Thread Richard Yao
with their architecture and distribution. Gentoo Linux is preferred, but not required. No knowledge of programming is required. I will provide you with instructions on how to build and test ZFS on your architecture. Yours truly, Richard Yao signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Porting ZFS to additional architectures

2013-02-05 Thread Richard Yao
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~* sys-fs/zfs` will work on additional architectures. If users request that Gentoo support ZFS on their platforms, then we will be in a position to consider that. Yours truly, Richard Yao On 02/05/2013 03:58 PM, Matt Turner wrote: On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Richard Yao r

Re: [gentoo-dev] Porting ZFS to additional architectures

2013-02-06 Thread Richard Yao
On 02/06/2013 02:12 AM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:25:56 -0500 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: I want to port ZFSOnLinux to all Gentoo Linux architectures this year. The above architectures either are not currently supported or have not been tested in a while. Most

Re: [gentoo-dev] Porting ZFS to additional architectures

2013-02-06 Thread Richard Yao
On 02/06/2013 11:26 AM, Alec Warner wrote: On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: Dear Everyone, Does anyone have root access to Linux systems on any of the following architectures that is willing to help ZFS development? Alpha HPPA IA-64 MIPS/MIPS64 PPC

[gentoo-dev] Evaluating a new malloc()

2013-02-26 Thread Richard Yao
The Blender project found some fairly remarkable discrepancies between what their software actually used and what glibc's ptmalloc allocated: http://www.sintel.org/development/memory-jemalloc/ Results such as these led Blender and others (e.g. Chrome/Chromium, Firefox, Thunderbird) to bundle

Re: [gentoo-dev] Evaluating a new malloc()

2013-02-26 Thread Richard Yao
On 02/26/2013 08:35 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: On 26/02/2013 14:33, Richard Yao wrote: Results such as these led Blender and others (e.g. Chrome/Chromium, Firefox, Thunderbird) to bundle private versions of jemalloc. This bundling situation violates our policy against bundled libraries

Re: [gentoo-dev] Evaluating a new malloc()

2013-02-26 Thread Richard Yao
On 02/26/2013 08:48 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: On 26/02/13 14:33, Richard Yao wrote: The Blender project found some fairly remarkable discrepancies between what their software actually used and what glibc's ptmalloc allocated Have they filed a bug? I don't know. You should ask them

[gentoo-dev] New license: CROSSOVER-2

2013-03-26 Thread Richard Yao
It appears that codeweavers has changed their licensing terms for crossover. We will need to commit a new license to the tree if we are going to package newer versions. I have attached a both the proposed license and a diff showing the differences between the new license and the old license. The

[gentoo-dev] Re: New eclass: games-bin (review/comments)

2013-03-26 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/23/2013 04:53 PM, hasufell wrote: After packaging the complete humble bundle last time I noticed a bit of code duplication. Nothing serious, but I still think there could be a small eclass making things easier. Especially the remove_bundled_libs function and the is useful IMO and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devmanual moved to github

2013-05-12 Thread Richard Yao
On 05/12/2013 09:15 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote: The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your local trees using the following command: Developers: git remote set-url origin g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org

[gentoo-dev] dm-crypt reordering BIOs across barriers?

2013-06-07 Thread Richard Yao
When you use dm-crypt, block IO requests to a dm-* device will invoke dm_request_fn() - map_request() - crypt_map(). If a BIO is a write barrier, crypt_map() will return DM_MAPIO_REMAPPED to map_request(), which will immediately queue it to the device. If a few dozen IOs are queued in rapid

Re: [gentoo-dev] dm-crypt reordering BIOs across barriers?

2013-06-08 Thread Richard Yao
On 06/08/2013 02:11 AM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: On Fri, 07 Jun 2013 23:47:33 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: When you use dm-crypt, block IO requests to a dm-* device will invoke dm_request_fn() - map_request() - crypt_map(). If a BIO is a write barrier, crypt_map() will return

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-kernel] Proper distribution integration of kernel *-sources, patches and configuration.

2013-07-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 07/01/2013 03:23 PM, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 08:45:16PM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote: Q: What about my stable server? I really don't want to run this stuff! A: These options would depend on !CONFIG_VANILLA or CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL What is CONFIG_VANILLA? I don't see that in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-kernel] Proper distribution integration of kernel *-sources, patches and configuration.

2013-07-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 07/01/2013 09:36 PM, Richard Yao wrote: On 07/01/2013 03:23 PM, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 08:45:16PM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote: Q: What about my stable server? I really don't want to run this stuff! A: These options would depend on !CONFIG_VANILLA or CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-kernel] Proper distribution integration of kernel *-sources, patches and configuration.

2013-07-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 07/01/2013 09:56 PM, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 09:36:21PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: On 07/01/2013 03:23 PM, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 08:45:16PM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote: Q: What about my stable server? I really don't want to run this stuff! A: These options

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-kernel] Proper distribution integration of kernel *-sources, patches and configuration.

2013-07-01 Thread Richard Yao
Furthermore, should the kernel kernel choose to engage that out-of-tree code, my expectation is that its quality will improve as they do testing and write patches. What do you mean by this? I probably should have clarified that there was a typo in that. I meant the kernel team, not the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-kernel] Proper distribution integration of kernel *-sources, patches and configuration.

2013-07-01 Thread Richard Yao
On 07/01/2013 11:29 PM, Richard Yao wrote: On 07/01/2013 09:56 PM, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 09:36:21PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: That is because fixes for other filesystems are either held back by a lack of system kernel updates or held hostage by regressions in newer kernels

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: escape sequences in logs

2013-09-02 Thread Richard Yao
On 09/02/2013 03:21 PM, William Hubbs wrote: All, I'm starting a new thread on this, because I think it might warrant some discussion. I can see why someone might want to use escape codes for color displays, etc. However, imo, escape codes do not belong in log files. mgorny says many

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

2013-09-10 Thread Richard Yao
On 09/08/2013 08:06 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 19:08:57 -0400 Rick \Zero_Chaos\ Farina zeroch...@gentoo.org wrote: Personally I think this would be a great stepping stone. If we add - -fstack-protector to 4.8.1 it will improve security (only a little I know) and give us an

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

2013-09-12 Thread Richard Yao
On 09/12/2013 11:03 AM, Richard Yao wrote: On 09/10/2013 09:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: 1. The kernel expects -fno-stack-protector to be the default. What will the effect be on kernel configuration once -fstack-protector

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

2013-09-12 Thread Richard Yao
On 09/10/2013 09:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: 1. The kernel expects -fno-stack-protector to be the default. What will the effect be on kernel configuration once -fstack-protector is the default? Nothing, since the kernel build

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

2013-09-12 Thread Richard Yao
On 09/11/2013 02:07 AM, Ryan Hill wrote: On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 18:41:34 -0400 Richard Yao r...@gentoo.org wrote: A few thoughts: 1. The kernel expects -fno-stack-protector to be the default. What will the effect be on kernel configuration once -fstack-protector is the default? The kernel

[gentoo-dev] Import CeDILL-1.1 License into Portage Tree

2012-02-14 Thread Richard Yao
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I would like to write an ebuild for some software that is CeDILL-1.1 licensed, but the license is not in the portage tree. The CeDILL-2 license is in the portage tree. I had a chat with robbat in #gentoo-dev on freenode about importing this license

Re: [gentoo-dev] Import CeDILL-1.1 License into Portage Tree

2012-02-14 Thread Richard Yao
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I would like to clarify that this is the CeCILL-1.1 license and the license in tree is CeCILL-2. On 02/14/12 03:14, Richard Yao wrote: I would like to write an ebuild for some software that is CeDILL-1.1 licensed, but the license

Re: [gentoo-dev] About gcc-4.6 unmasking

2012-02-20 Thread Richard Yao
We had a chat about this in #gentoo-dev the other night. I might come up with a solution as part of the ZFS stuff that I am doing, but it won't happen for at least a month. With that said, it doesn't look like GRUB is the only blocker: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=gcc-4.6 On Mon, Feb

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: About gcc-4.6 unmasking

2012-02-20 Thread Richard Yao
to find the bug. Yours truly, Richard Yao On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 21:34:14 +0100 Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote: I don't know if this has been discussed before but, what issues are preventing us from unmasking gcc-4.6

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: About gcc-4.6 unmasking

2012-02-20 Thread Richard Yao
I took a look at the problem cited in your bug report. I suggest compiling sys-boot/grub with CFLAGS=-O0 -ggdb3, attaching gdb to grub-install and then watching what happens in the debugger. If you compare runs with a GCC 4.5.3 built stage2 and a GCC 4.6.2 built stage2, you should be able to

Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

2012-02-24 Thread Richard Yao
Am I the only paranoid person who moves them rather than unlinking them?  Oh, if only btrfs were stable... Is this a reference to snapshots? You can use ZFS for those. The kernel modules are only available in the form of ebuilds right now, but they your data should be safe unless you go

Re: [gentoo-dev] btrfs status and/was: preserve_old_lib

2012-02-24 Thread Richard Yao
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Have you tried ZFS? The kernel modules are in the portage tree and I am maintaining a FAQ regarding the status of Gentoo ZFS support at github: https://github.com/gentoofan/zfs-overlay/wiki/FAQ Data stored on ZFS is generally safe unless you go out

Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

2012-02-25 Thread Richard Yao
Oh, if you need a safe COW filesystem today I'd definitely recommend ZFS over btrfs for sure, although I suspect the people who are most likely to take this sort of advice are also the sort of people who are most likely to not be running Gentoo.  There are a bazillion problems with btrfs as

Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

2012-02-25 Thread Richard Yao
Why would btrfs be inferior to ZFS on multiple disks?  I can't see how its architecture would do any worse, and the planned features are superior to ZFS (which isn't to say that ZFS can't improve either). ZFS uses ARC as its page replacement algorithm, which is superior to the LRU page

Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy

2012-02-25 Thread Richard Yao
That isn't my understanding as far as raidz reshaping goes.  You can create raidz's and add them to a zpool.  You can add individual drives/partitions to zpools.  You can remove any of these from a zpool at any time and have it move data into other storage areas.  However, you can't reshape a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Submit project ideas NOW for Google Summer of Code 2012

2012-03-07 Thread Richard Yao
I am not a developer yet, but I would like to suggest some idea possibilities: Minix port of Gentoo Illumos port of Gentoo LLVM/Clang System Compiler Support ICC System Compiler Support (probably easier than LLVM/Clang) Port of Gentoo/FreeBSD to amd64 (or other architectures) Gentoo/FreeBSD KVM

Re: [gentoo-dev] Deprecate EAPI1?

2012-03-11 Thread Richard Yao
These must be maintained indefinitely to provide an upgrade path for older Gentoo Linux installations. It is rare, but people do upgrade old installs from time to time. Without some EAPI=1 packages, there is no path for people to use to upgrade. On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Pacho Ramos

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD : .ebuild is only bash

2012-03-13 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/12/12 11:57, Kent Fredric wrote: On 12 March 2012 22:37, Brian Harring ferri...@gmail.com wrote: Ebuilds *are* bash. There isn't ever going to be a PMS labeled xml format that is known as ebuilds... that's just pragmatic reality since such a beast is clearly a seperate format (thus

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 14:56, Zac Medico wrote: On 03/14/2012 11:36 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 19:58, Matthew Summers quantumsumm...@gentoo.org wrote: Why is an in-kernel initramfs so bad anyway? I am baffled. Its quite nice to have a minimal recovery env in case mounting fails,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 16:55, Zac Medico wrote: On 03/14/2012 01:03 PM, Richard Yao wrote: I do not have a separate /usr partition, however I agree with Joshua Kinard's stance regarding the /usr move. The point of having a separate /usr was to enable UNIX to exceed the space constraints that a 1.5MB

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 17:04, Greg KH wrote: On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 07:57:52PM +, David Leverton wrote: Would anyone else like to continue with their own favourite separate-/usr reason? Haveing a separate /usr is wonderful, and once we finish moving /sbin/ and /bin/ into /usr/ it makes even more

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 18:49, Greg KH wrote: On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 06:39:05PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: With that said, I have a few questions: 1. Why does no one mention the enterprise use case at all? It has been pointed out before, why constantly repeat ourselves. Simple. No one has documented

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
:) greg k-h I proposed a way that this could work with no effort on the part of the Gentoo developers in one of my earlier emails: On 03/14/12 17:05, Richard Yao wrote: In the meantime, it should be possible to create a global usr USE flag that enables/disables gen_usr_ldscript. It would

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 19:44, Greg KH wrote: Now, to get back to what I said before, I'm done with this thread, it's going nowhere, and it seems I'm just making it worse, my apologies. For penance, I'll adopt the next abandoned package someone throws at me, any suggestions? Bug #360513 needs work.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 20:36, David Leverton wrote: On 14 March 2012 23:47, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote: It's more about what we're _not_ doing that what we're doing. Clearly something must have changed in udev 181 to make /usr-without-initramfs not work anymore, and someone must have done

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 21:07, Rich Freeman wrote: On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Richard Yao r...@cs.stonybrook.edu wrote: I proposed a way that this could work with no effort on the part of the Gentoo developers in one of my earlier emails: Then go ahead and make it happen. If as you say no dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-14 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/14/12 21:06, Zac Medico wrote: On 03/14/2012 05:58 PM, Richard Yao wrote: On 03/14/12 20:36, David Leverton wrote: On 14 March 2012 23:47, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote: It's more about what we're _not_ doing that what we're doing. Clearly something must have changed in udev 181

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/15/12 08:40, Joshua Kinard wrote: I already looked in the tree and nothing really stands out as a suitable replacement for /dev management. mdev might, but it's part of busybox and not standalone as far as I know (at least, we don't have an independent package for it). Busybox is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/15/12 08:34, Joshua Kinard wrote: On 03/14/2012 19:27, Richard Yao wrote: On 03/14/12 18:49, Greg KH wrote: 2. Why not make rootfs a NFS mount with a unionfs at the SAN/NAS device? unionfs is still a work in progress, some systems can't do that yet. That sounds like something

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-15 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/15/12 22:43, Greg KH wrote: On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:47:12PM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: On 03/15/2012 10:41, Greg KH wrote: There's always mudev if you don't want to run udev, good luck with that. Got a link? We don't have anything matching in the tree, and Google turns up

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

2012-03-16 Thread Richard Yao
Take your pick: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/treecleaners/maintainer-needed.xml On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Greg KH gre...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:01:19PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: On 03/15/12 22:43, Greg KH wrote: On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:47:12PM -0400

Re: [gentoo-dev] Change USE flags when compiling with FEATURES=test

2012-03-17 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/17/12 15:43, Kent Fredric wrote: On 18 March 2012 08:33, Matt Turner matts...@gentoo.org wrote: So you run set FEATURES=test to run a package's test suite during keywording. Later, you emerge -vuNDa ... and portage wants to reemerge that package with USE=-test. Can't we avoid this

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: License problem

2012-03-21 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/21/12 10:18, Justin wrote: I will not extract part of the software, e.g. subroutines, for use in other contexts without permission of the author. Portage could be considered to be one of these contexts. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: License problem

2012-03-21 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/21/12 10:48, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: On 21/03/12 10:34 AM, Richard Yao wrote: On 03/21/12 10:18, Justin wrote: I will not extract part of the software, e.g. subroutines, for use in other contexts without permission of the author. Portage could be considered to be one of these contexts

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: License problem

2012-03-21 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/21/12 11:14, Justin wrote: On 21.03.2012 15:48, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: On 21/03/12 10:34 AM, Richard Yao wrote: On 03/21/12 10:18, Justin wrote: I will not extract part of the software, e.g. subroutines, for use in other contexts without permission of the author. Portage could

Re: [gentoo-dev] About suggesting to create a separate partition for portage tree in handbook

2012-03-27 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/27/12 14:34, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: The partitioning scheme is something that the user needs to decide on *before* getting Gentoo up and running. After the user had finished installing the operating system, it's too late to inform him about the advantages of a separate /usr/portage.

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree

2012-03-27 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/27/12 15:13, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: On 03/27/2012 03:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote: All, I know this has come up before, but I don't really recall what the specific objections were. IMO the portage directory doesn't belong under /usr at all. I was chatting with another developer who

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/28/12 10:24, Kent Fredric wrote: Just use categories from repos? /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-devel/gcc-1.2.tar.bz2 /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-libs/glibc-2.3.tar.bz2 /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-libs/zlib-3.4.tar.bz2 /usr/portage/distfiles/zomg-soft/zomgawesomesoft-5.3.1.tar.xz (from

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/28/12 10:42, Richard Yao wrote: On 03/28/12 10:24, Kent Fredric wrote: Just use categories from repos? /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-devel/gcc-1.2.tar.bz2 /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-libs/glibc-2.3.tar.bz2 /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-libs/zlib-3.4.tar.bz2 /usr/portage/distfiles/zomg-soft

Re: [gentoo-dev] About suggesting to create a separate partition for portage tree in handbook

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/28/12 03:16, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 19:16 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: But that's ok, because extensive studies have shown that the only possible reasons for putting /usr/portage on its own partition are historical, since everyone has an SSD now. Yeah, right.

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: location of portage tree

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/27/12 15:59, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: On 03/27/2012 03:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:40 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:25:58AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: On 28 March 2012 08:05, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:

[gentoo-dev] New License: FreeBSD License

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
Gentoo/FreeBSD is currently using the BSD license, but it seems that this is not the license used by the BSD project: http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html In particular, the FreeBSD license removes the third clause and appends The views and conclusions contained in the software

Re: [gentoo-dev] New License: FreeBSD License

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/28/12 20:27, Richard Yao wrote: Gentoo/FreeBSD is currently using the BSD license, but it seems that this is not the license used by the BSD project: http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html In particular, the FreeBSD license removes the third clause and appends

Re: [gentoo-dev] New License: FreeBSD License

2012-03-28 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/28/12 21:28, Tim Harder wrote: On 2012-03-28 Wed 17:31, Richard Yao wrote: Gentoo/FreeBSD is currently using the BSD license, but it seems that this is not the license used by the BSD project: http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html In particular, the FreeBSD license

[gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
I wrote sys-freebsd/virtio-kmod (bug 410199) while studying Gentoo/FreeBSD as part of an attempt to port gptzfsloader to Gentoo Linux. naota wrote an improvement that would be useful to send upstream. However, the GPL-2 license poses a problem according to conversations that I had in #gentoo-dev.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/30/12 13:34, Alexis Ballier wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:34:26 -0400 Richard Yao r...@cs.stonybrook.edu wrote: I wrote sys-freebsd/virtio-kmod (bug 410199) while studying Gentoo/FreeBSD as part of an attempt to port gptzfsloader to Gentoo Linux. naota wrote an improvement that would

Re: [gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/30/12 13:52, Richard Yao wrote: I want sys-freebsd/virtio-kmod to be BSD-2 licensed, but I do not expect the version that enters the portage tree to be BSD-2 licensed unless people clarify that it is okay to license ebuilds under something other than the GPL-2. To clarify, I would like

Re: [gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/30/12 14:00, Jon Portnoy wrote: On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 01:52:18PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: The improvement is to the ebuild itself. It is a variable containing a list of directories upon which the module's build system depends. I spoke to naota and he doesn't have any problem sending

Re: [gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/30/12 14:47, Ulrich Mueller wrote: I fail to understand what the license of the ebuild has to do with the license of the package itself. It has nothing to do with the license of the package. That is completely separate. This has to do with the license of the ebuild itself. FreeBSD Ports

Re: [gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/30/12 15:12, Rich Freeman wrote: If there are specific pains associated with not being able to submit patches upstream or such, please do point them out and I'm sure we'll consider what can be done to accommodate this. However, if this really is a one-off situation then we're probably

Re: [gentoo-dev] Relicensing sys-freebsd/* under the BSD-2 license

2012-03-30 Thread Richard Yao
On 03/30/12 16:19, Alec Warner wrote: I doubt you can get the content re-licensed under a different license. You may be able to convince folks to add an additional license (|| (GPL-2 BSD-2)). That way Gentoo keeps its GPL-2 and freebsd can have the code as BSD-2. Dual-licensing is fine by me.

  1   2   3   >