On Saturday 06 January 2007 00:43, Daniel Barkalow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage?':
(Actually, I think that it would be even better
to have the etc-update/dispatch-conf step done before the ebuild qmerge
step, so that the user's chosen config file
On Thu, 4 Jan 2007, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 20:24, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
I didn't say it shouldn't require interaction to get the new shipped
version; I said it should require extra confirmation to discard
changes made locally. It should also be able to offer
On Thursday 04 January 2007 09:44, Neil Bothwick wrote:
File a bug, the ebuild shouldn't be reporting this if it is unnecessary
or confusing.
I think I'll wait a little while for the new bug tracker, but that's
something worth reporting, I guess.
You can file it on the new bug
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 00:45:00 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
Perhaps it just needs to be more popular, or maybe it needs to
understand slots better (in order to be popular). I know that all of
the kernels I install tell me that support for devfs was removed long
before the oldest kernel
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 00:21:02 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
The issue is that etc-update doesn't have the version of the config
file as installed by the version of the package that's being replaced,
so it can't tell the difference between non-trivial changes to the
config file as shipped
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 11:03:34 - Nelson, David (ED, PARD)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has the idea of distributing custom package.mask files
occured? This way you can mask off certain versions of software and
hence limit updates to minor changes. You can then use these on
systems you
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 13:03, Nelson, David (ED, PARD) wrote:
Hi folks,
Has the idea of distributing custom package.mask files occured?
This way you can mask off certain versions of software and hence
limit updates to minor changes. You can then use these on systems you
want to
On Tuesday 02 January 2007 14:26, William Kenworthy wrote:
rattus ~ # emerge system -ep
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating system dependencies ... done!
rattus ~ #
3 systems like this, one installed only a few months ago works.
And
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Alan McKinnon wrote:
The only possible thing etc-update could ever do is look for trivial
changes and ignore them. How would you detect the difference between
non-trivial changes to shipped versions and non-trivial changes made
locally?
Keep a copy of the config files
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 00:21:02 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
The issue is that etc-update doesn't have the version of the config
file as installed by the version of the package that's being replaced,
so it can't tell the difference between
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007 00:45:00 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
Perhaps it just needs to be more popular, or maybe it needs to
understand slots better (in order to be popular). I know that all of
the kernels I install tell me that support for
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 20:24, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Alan McKinnon wrote:
The only possible thing etc-update could ever do is look for
trivial changes and ignore them. How would you detect the
difference between non-trivial changes to shipped versions and
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 01:50:27 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
I think it would be useful to have an ebuild thing for upgrading to
this package from version {expression} requires the following steps,
such that the message will be displayed only if you're doing that, and
such that the upgrade
On Monday 01 January 2007 04:34, Mike Myers wrote:
The update system is the -only- nice thing about it over Gentoo.
Debian is nowhere near Gentoo when it comes to everything else
(especially docs). I don't think suggesting a single feature that
another distro has and putting into Gentoo is
On Tuesday 02 January 2007 08:50, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
I also think that emerge should keep track of the config files
installed by packages, so that etc-update knows if you've got local
modifications, and give you a big warning when you might lose a
change you made.
Huh? Portage already
On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 23:36:02 +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
Yeah, it would be good to know an update is not going to give a broken
system - but to implement some sort of (extra) tagged release testing
would be a significant amount of effort for the community.
Only if you rely on the current
On Monday 01 January 2007 06:58, William Kenworthy wrote:
rattus ~ # emerge system -ep
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating system dependencies ... done!
rattus ~ #
3 systems like this, one installed only a few months ago works.
And `emerge --info` ?
--
Bo
On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 12:19 +0100, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
On Monday 01 January 2007 06:58, William Kenworthy wrote:
rattus ~ # emerge system -ep
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating system dependencies ... done!
rattus ~ #
3 systems like this, one
On Mon, 01 Jan 2007 02:29:12 +0300, Mike Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm sure others will disagree, but I really think if Gentoo is going to
become a cornerstone in the desktop's replacement (like for thin clients)
then there should probably be an option for a binary 'version' of
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 02 January 2007 08:50, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
I also think that emerge should keep track of the config files
installed by packages, so that etc-update knows if you've got local
modifications, and give you a big warning when you might lose
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 01:50:27 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
I think it would be useful to have an ebuild thing for upgrading to
this package from version {expression} requires the following steps,
such that the message will be displayed only
On Wednesday 03 January 2007 07:21, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 02 January 2007 08:50, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
I also think that emerge should keep track of the config files
installed by packages, so that etc-update knows if you've got
Mike Myers wrote:
(snippage)
I'm not trying to suggest that Gentoo should go to a binary distro or
anything like that. I'm just wondering why there
isn't some kind of update management system to like, differentiate minor
updates like firefox 1.5.0.5 http://1.5.0.5 to firefox 1.5.0.7
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 19:01:25 -0600, Mike Myers wrote:
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically, there's
package updates, and then there's distro updates. Why is it
unreasonable for Gentoo to have
I totally agree to neil's assessment. Mike certainly has point that
Debian is more mature in some aspects (is has been around since '93).
That being said it is lacking so much in other departments that for me
it is no serious alternative to Gentoo (difficulty installing source
packages not in
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Mike Myers wrote:
On 12/31/06, Mark Kirkwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about.
Very good ideas in this thread. Why not open a thread in the Gentoo
forums and start a public discussion there?
In regard to your question, have you thought about the --oneshot option?
That way you can manually upgrade the packages you see fit.
James wrote:
Mike Myers fluffymikey at
On Sunday 31 December 2006 12:18, Aniruddha wrote:
Very good ideas in this thread. Why not open a thread in the Gentoo
forums and start a public discussion there?
In regard to your question, have you thought about the --oneshot option?
That way you can manually upgrade the packages you see
On 31 December 2006 15:40, Mick wrote:
The PC centric desktop on which M$ built their business model may be under
threat. If the WebOS [1], GoogleOS [2], internet based desktop [3], etc.
take off, then what will enable Gentoo to become a predominant system of
choice both in the server and in
On Sunday 31 December 2006 16:02, Uwe Thiem wrote:
On 31 December 2006 15:40, Mick wrote:
The PC centric desktop on which M$ built their business model may be
under threat. If the WebOS [1], GoogleOS [2], internet based desktop
[3], etc. take off, then what will enable Gentoo to become a
On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 06:20:23PM +, Mick wrote:
The second is nearly photo-realistic games.
Of course. That is I think one area where a thin client will not be able to
compete with a modern desktop PC. I don't play games and haven't seen what
sort of latency a game played through
On 31 December 2006 20:20, Mick wrote:
On Sunday 31 December 2006 16:02, Uwe Thiem wrote:
This won't happen for various reasons.
In the business world, the main reason is security. Who will trust
an Internet Desktop Provider with their internal documents?
The same people who are
On 31 December 2006 20:57, Michal 'vorner' Vaner wrote:
On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 06:20:23PM +, Mick wrote:
The second is nearly photo-realistic games.
Of course. That is I think one area where a thin client will not be able
to compete with a modern desktop PC. I don't play games and
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically, there's package
updates, and then there's distro updates. Why is it unreasonable for Gentoo
to have something
Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically, there's
package updates, and then there's distro updates. Why is it
unreasonable for
Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their
updating system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically,
there's package updates, and then there's distro updates. Why is it
unreasonable for
Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically, there's
package updates, and then there's distro updates. Why is it
unreasonable for
On 12/31/06, Mark Kirkwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically, there's
package updates, and then
On 12/31/06, Mark Knecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their
updating
system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically, there's
package updates, and
On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 19:01 -0600, Mike Myers wrote:
I just wanted to add something to the original post.
I've recently began experimenting with Debian and noticed their
updating system is exactly like what I was asking about. Basically,
there's package updates, and then there's distro
On 12/31/06, William Kenworthy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, on most of my machines system is empty (went that way soon
after each install - no idea why) so all I am left with is world.
What do mean? The system package set is defined by
/usr/portage/profiles/base/packages, and extended by
On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 21:35 -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
On 12/31/06, William Kenworthy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, on most of my machines system is empty (went that way soon
after each install - no idea why) so all I am left with is world.
What do mean? The system package set is
On 12/26/06, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Myers fluffymikey at gmail.com writes:
Hi! I know I don't post here much but I read it a lot and have been
using
Gentoo for several years now. I keep seeing users mention about how they
do an
update and then everything goes to crap. I've
On 12/27/06, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Myers fluffymikey at gmail.com writes:
I think I like your idea better, about distributing binaries. Do you
know if
something like this is being worked on? I'm certain that a common method
to
this, like what you're saying, would allow Gentoo
Mike Myers fluffymikey at gmail.com writes:
Hi! I know I don't post here much but I read it a lot and have been using
Gentoo for several years now. I keep seeing users mention about how they do an
update and then everything goes to crap. I've experienced this myself quite a
bit too. I
On 26 December 2006 17:56, James wrote:
So I update the test workstation on fridays, use it over the weekend a
nd then update the other systems. Granted, if the devs release something
(broken) over the weekend, I get screwed with this scheme sometimes.
I should update the test system daily
46 matches
Mail list logo
