On 09/17/2011 07:00 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
There was a standards body tracking ORB, I forget which one, but none
of that matters as the folks who should use it - system builders - saw
it's flaws quite quickly. Even Gnome has dropped it and are now moving
over to dbus.
Ooh, I know this
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:25:11PM +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 01:43:17 PM Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com
wrote:
(This mail is to keep the guys un -user in the loop about -devel).
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 19:31:31 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
There are two principle things I dislike about D-Bus.
1) It doesn't support live upgrading of the daemon. We discussed the
reasons behind this several weeks ago, as I recall. Transparent
session control handoff is, of
On Saturday, September 17, 2011 02:43:00 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
On Friday, September 16, 2011 10:53:47 AM Canek Peláez Valdés
On Sep 18, 2011 9:50 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Saturday, September 17, 2011 02:43:00 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
As I keep saying: code talks.
Yes, but the developers are quiet with regards to that patch.
I can understand if it takes some time to analyse a patch,
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:13:36 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
ORBit was the GNOME implementation of ORB; I don't remember what KDE
used, but I believe it was also ORB based.
KDE 2/3 used DCOP, their own IPC as there was no decent standard system
at the time. DBus was heavily influenced by
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 06:59:44PM +0100, Mick wrote
The only drawback is the 2 minutes it will take a user the first time this
change is introduced to build the initramfs and change the kernel line in
grub.conf. I am warming up to this proposal because it seems to me that it
will end up
On Friday, September 16, 2011 11:21:12 PM Pandu Poluan wrote:
On Sep 16, 2011 11:00 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluanpa...@poluan.info wrote:
Speaking of fsck, didn't someone lamented the fact that fsck can no
On Friday, September 16, 2011 10:53:47 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:05:00 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Last time I checked, neither GNOME nor Emacs demanded that Gentoo
developers
On Saturday, September 17, 2011 08:45:15 AM Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Friday, September 16, 2011 10:53:47 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I think systemd gives you that in servers. With OpenRC and Apache with
user CGI scripts, ¿do you know how to list the httpd daemon spawned
processes, and
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 08:45:15 +0200
Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
I consider dbus to be part of the GUI as I don't see a reason for
apache, syslog, nfs, samba, to be using dbus to communicate with
each other.
To be fair, dbus could be useful for service apps too. It provides a
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Friday, September 16, 2011 10:53:47 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:05:00 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Saturday, September 17, 2011 08:45:15 AM Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Friday, September 16, 2011 10:53:47 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
I think systemd gives you that in servers. With OpenRC and Apache with
user CGI
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
[[snippage]]
I still think Gnome (or any other desktop environment) should not care about
which init-system is being used.
And they will
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
[[snippage]]
I still think Gnome (or any other desktop environment)
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Friday, September 16, 2011 10:53:47 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés I would like for
you to be more specific about them.
Sockets, be they UNIX domain
On 2011-09-17 20:36, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
They are standard in the sense that they are a low level communication
standard API. An IPC is *way* more than that; dbus is an IPC, because
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Inter-process_communication
then you have high level
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés I would like for
you
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:03 PM, pk pete...@coolmail.se wrote:
On 2011-09-17 20:36, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
They are standard in the sense that they are a low level communication
standard API. An IPC is *way* more than that; dbus is an IPC, because
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 15:24:39 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, there *was* an standard that did everything dbus does: ORB, the
Object Request Broker. They tried to use that as IPC years ago, but
is so damn complicated to implement right they decided to better
implement a new
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, 17 Sep 2011 15:24:39 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
Dbus is an interesting piece of technology and rather useful, it does
it a disservice to knock it.
Honestly, I really only want to provide
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 06:44:58 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Mike Edenfield kut...@kutulu.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:16:03 PM Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:34:11 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
[ Hugemongous snip ]
If the Gentoo-devs come up with a fool-proof solution
No such thing in computing, I think.
I'm afraid you're right on
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:38:41 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 03:04:37 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:05:00 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote:
Am 15.09.2011 22:27, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de
On Sep 16, 2011 4:03 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:38:41 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
[--major snippage--]
I see it the other way around: you ensure that your initramfs is in
sync with your system. In other words: the initramfs contains a
On Thursday, 15. September 2011 20:22:17 Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Chris Brennan xa...@xaerolimit.net wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Leonardo Guilherme
leonardo.guilhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not know the state of Geanny since I last checked (couple of
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:02 +0200
Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Anyway, Debian is the only big distro recommending separated /usr,
and then only for multiuser setups. It's really years since I've
looked at the recommended partition schemes: when I started using
Linux, a
On Friday, September 16, 2011 12:00:16 PM Alan McKinnon wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:46:02 +0200
Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Anyway, Debian is the only big distro recommending separated /usr,
and then only for multiuser setups. It's really years since I've
looked at the
On 9/15/2011 8:22 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
I don't show an ebuild for eclipse (I see dev-java/ant-eclipse-ecj,
dev-java/eclipse-ecj and dev-util/eclipse-sdk). Last time I poked
eclipse, it was a royal pain using any *DT unless one downloaded it as
a packaged deal. Version dependencies were a
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Mike Edenfield kut...@kutulu.org wrote:
On 9/15/2011 8:22 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
But 3.6 introduced a *ton* of new dependencies that the Gentoo folks
haven't been able to work out properly in portage.[1]
Of course, that's also likely an indication that
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:54:46 +0200
Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
Using layout suggestions from install docs to justify what the udev
maintainers want to do is simply disingenuous.
I referenced that asa response to the list of distro-guides.
I was backing you up, not arguing
Hi, Michael.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 08:22:17PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
I don't see an ebuild for Emacs CC-Mode.
CC Mode is distributed along with the rest of {,X}Emacs (although I think
XEmacs half-splits all its packages off from its cord).
Those version of CC Mode are somewhat out of
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:08 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:05:00 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote:
Am 15.09.2011 22:27, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
On Thu, Sep
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote:
On Sep 16, 2011 4:03 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 05:38:41 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
[--major snippage--]
I see it the other way around: you ensure that your
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluanpa...@poluan.info wrote:
Speaking of fsck, didn't someone lamented the fact that fsck can no longer
be statically linked, thus making initr* 'blew up' in size?
When more and more utilities go the non-statically-linked
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluanpa...@poluan.info wrote:
Speaking of fsck, didn't someone lamented the fact that fsck can no
longer
be statically linked, thus making initr* 'blew up'
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluanpa...@poluan.info wrote:
Speaking of fsck, didn't someone lamented the fact that fsck can no
longer
be statically linked, thus making initr* 'blew up'
On Sep 16, 2011 11:00 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluanpa...@poluan.info wrote:
Speaking of fsck, didn't someone lamented the fact that fsck can no
longer
be statically linked, thus making initr* 'blew up' in
Mark Knecht wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Pandu Poluanpa...@poluan.infowrote:
Speaking of fsck, didn't someone lamented the fact that fsck can no
longer
be statically linked, thus making
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 10:57 -0500, Dale wrote:
Give it time. Something will need /home on the root partition next.
Like someone else posted, we are headed towards windows land with
this.
I won't be surprised if /boot will have to be on / next too.
Dale
:-) :-)
Funnily enough,
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:30:03 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:33:01 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer
grim...@gmx.de
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:37:14 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 17:10:40 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
No, by you know what needs to be done I mean: code. Contribute.
Become a developer.
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 06:40:44 PM Sebastian Beßler wrote:
This thread goes in endless circles, round and round and round.
In the last 20 posts or so is not one new argument pro or con can be
found, both sides only repeating their pov over and over again.
Nothing will be achieved
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
There are not many people who agree with you here.
The changes will lead to a C:-drive, similar to MS Windows, where everything
has to be a single partition.
Technically, this isn't true. %PROGRAMFILES need not be on
On 14 September 2011, at 22:34, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
…
That's got nothing to do with it, and it's rude of you to make this
about Canek, IMO.
Given how much Canek has been saying about free/open source recently, the
attitudes he's been attributing to its developers (which don't accord
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 09:47:34 AM Michael Mol wrote:
The main purpose of udev is to populate the /dev-tree.
The running of scripts based on /dev-tree events should be in a seperate
tool that starts later in the boot-process.
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, because
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, because it feels like
some situations like network devices (nbd, iSCSI) or loopback would
require userland tools to bring up once networking is up.
Yes, but the
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 10:32:50 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, because it feels like
some situations like network devices (nbd, iSCSI) or loopback would
require userland
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, because it feels like
some situations like network devices (nbd, iSCSI) or loopback would
require
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 10:32:50 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, because it feels like
some
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 10:32:50 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, because it feels like
some
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
Of course you can solve it differently, for example splitting udev as
Joost proposes. But then is more code to maintain, and the number of
possible setups is suddenly the double it was before. It. Is. Not.
KISS.
If
On Thursday, 15. September 2011 16:48:45 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
I agree he is wrong about the solution as well.
I have actually just posted my idea to the gentoo-dev list to see how the
developers actually feel about possible splitting udev into 2 parts.
I've read it there. Thanks for doing
On Thursday, 15. September 2011 11:03:09 Michael Mol wrote:
Yes, except that udev ONLY handles kernel-events and doesn't process any
actions itself.
These are placed on a seperate queue for a seperate process.
The problem with this is that you now need to manage synchronization
between
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Michael Schreckenbauer grim...@gmx.de wrote:
On Thursday, 15. September 2011 11:03:09 Michael Mol wrote:
Yes, except that udev ONLY handles kernel-events and doesn't process any
actions itself.
These are placed on a seperate queue for a seperate process.
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 10:57:27 AM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
snipped to keep only the email from Canek
Let me throw my own guess of how they came out with the corrent
proposed solution. I repeat: is my own guess: I am not the one calling
the shots, so maybe I'm completely wrong.
Ok
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:03:09 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 10:32:50 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
I'm
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:03:09 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
The problem with this is that you now need to manage synchronization
between
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:16:24 PM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:03:09 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
The
On 2011-09-15 16:57, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Of course you can solve it differently, for example splitting udev as
Joost proposes. But then is more code to maintain, and the number of
possible setups is suddenly the double it was before. It. Is. Not.
KISS.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 10:32:50 AM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org
wrote:
On Thursday 15 Sep 2011 16:13:26 Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
On Thursday, 15. September 2011 16:48:45 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
I agree he is wrong about the solution as well.
I have actually just posted my idea to the gentoo-dev list to see how the
developers actually feel about possible
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:37:53 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
There are 3 solutions for this:
1) The easy way out: the whole user-space must be available before udev
2) udev actually includes correct error-handling for this and retries
3) udev splits this into 2 seperate tools
4) udev remains
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:35:37 -0400, Michael Mol wrote about Re: Really
OT now (Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr):
It occurred to me that having a decent C and C++ editing environment
might ease some of my of the spoilage I've experienced in Visual
Studio for C++. I'll be checking it out. It'll
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 15 Sep 2011 16:13:26 Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
On Thursday, 15. September 2011 16:48:45 Joost Roeleveld wrote:
I agree he is wrong about the solution as well.
I have actually just posted my idea to the
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:58 PM, David W Noon dwn...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:35:37 -0400, Michael Mol wrote about Re: Really
OT now (Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr):
It occurred to me that having a decent C and C++ editing environment
might ease some of my of the spoilage
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 15:04:37 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
1. The minimal initramfs will only need to be built once (and rarely
rebuilt thereafter). This removes one of my fears and it was a main
objection for me
- I would hate to have to rebuild initramfs every time I roll a new
2011/9/15 Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 2:58 PM, David W Noon dwn...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 18:35:37 -0400, Michael Mol wrote about Re: Really
OT now (Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr):
It occurred to me that having a decent C and C++ editing
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Leonardo Guilherme
leonardo.guilhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not know the state of Geanny since I last checked (couple of years
ago), but the highlight capabilites of KDevelop got my eye. It highlights
local variables in different colors in the same context, so
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Chris Brennan xa...@xaerolimit.net wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Leonardo Guilherme
leonardo.guilhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not know the state of Geanny since I last checked (couple of years
ago), but the highlight capabilites of KDevelop got my
Am 15.09.2011 16:57, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
with an initramfs you will be able to do anything, so it will make no
sense to keep supporting initramfs-less systems.
With Microsoft Windows you will be able to do anything, so it will
make no sense to keep supporting Microsoft Windows-less
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:47:34 -0400
Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
The main purpose of udev is to populate the /dev-tree.
The running of scripts based on /dev-tree events should be in a
seperate tool that starts later in the boot-process.
I'm not *entirely* convinced this is the
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote:
Am 15.09.2011 16:57, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
with an initramfs you will be able to do anything, so it will make no
sense to keep supporting initramfs-less systems.
With Microsoft Windows you will be able
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 01:36:56 PM Dale wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
But that's the thing: we (you and me) don't see the situation the same
way. To me, the proposed changes are for the better.
You are one of very few that feel this way.
You are probably correct that he's
Am 15.09.2011 22:27, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote:
Am 15.09.2011 16:57, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
with an initramfs you will be able to do anything, so it will make no
sense to keep supporting initramfs-less
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Mike Edenfield kut...@kutulu.org wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 01:36:56 PM Dale wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
But that's the thing: we (you and me) don't see the situation the same
way. To me, the proposed changes are for the better.
You are
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote:
Am 15.09.2011 22:27, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Sebastian Beßler
sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote:
Am 15.09.2011 16:57, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
with an initramfs you will
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:42:23 PM Mike Edenfield wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 01:36:56 PM Dale wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
But that's the thing: we (you and me) don't see the situation the
same
way. To me, the proposed changes are for the better.
You are
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 01:43:17 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés can...@gmail.com
wrote:
(This mail is to keep the guys un -user in the loop about -devel).
OK, so Joost posted his proposal to -dev:
snipped brief discussion on
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:42:23 PM Mike Edenfield wrote:
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 01:36:56 PM Dale wrote:
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
But that's the thing: we (you and me) don't see the situation the
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 03:04:37 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 15 Sep 2011 16:13:26 Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
1. The minimal initramfs will only need to be built once (and rarely
rebuilt
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 07:15:27 PM Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:37:53 +0200, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
There are 3 solutions for this:
1) The easy way out: the whole user-space must be available before udev
2) udev actually includes correct error-handling for this and
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
[ Hugemongous snip ]
If the Gentoo-devs come up with a fool-proof solution
No such thing in computing, I think. But I also think is really
laudable that you want to ensure no many users will get bitten by this
change.
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 07:37:17 PM pk wrote:
On 2011-09-15 16:57, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Of course you can solve it differently, for example splitting udev as
Joost proposes. But then is more code to maintain, and the number of
possible setups is suddenly the double it was
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:16 PM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not touching KDE again for a while. I got nailed pretty bad with a
NVidia/Konsole/KWin, and I really wasn't using much of KDE.
That said, I might poke KDevelop again; I haven't poked it in years.
Geany is new since I
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Alexander Tanyukevich
atanyukev...@gmail.com wrote:
Try eclipse with cdk (C/C++ developr kit). Last time I've used it 3
years ago, but it was really good...
Sorry it's called CDT.
--
Alexander Tanyukevich
atanyukev...@gmail.com
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 03:04:37 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 15 Sep 2011 16:13:26 Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
1. The
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:05:29 PM Michael Mol wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Chris Brennan xa...@xaerolimit.net wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Leonardo Guilherme
leonardo.guilhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not know the state of Geanny since I last checked (couple
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:16:03 PM Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:42:23 PM Mike Edenfield wrote:
I would estimate that the vast, vast, vast majority of users are those
such as myslelf, who have no opinion whatsoever, and either will not be
affected at
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Mike Edenfield kut...@kutulu.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:16:03 PM Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:42:23 PM Mike Edenfield wrote:
I would estimate that the vast, vast, vast majority of users are those
such as
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Mark Knecht markkne...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Mike Edenfield kut...@kutulu.org wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 11:16:03 PM Joost Roeleveld wrote:
On Thursday, September 15, 2011 04:42:23 PM Mike Edenfield wrote:
I would
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Chris Brennan xa...@xaerolimit.net wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Leonardo Guilherme
leonardo.guilhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not know the state of Geanny since I last checked (couple of years
ago), but the highlight capabilites of KDevelop got my
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 17:10:40 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
No, by you know what needs to be done I mean: code. Contribute.
Become a developer. Make shit happens the way you think it should
happen.
You're happy to run an important system service coded by someone with
less experience than
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 05:10:40PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Is it simply subscribing to -dev and voicing the conversation there?
Of course not. But please, do that if you think it will help to steer
Gentoo to whatever direction do you think is the correct one.
Personaly I don't
On Wednesday 14 Sep 2011 11:25:23 Alan Mackenzie wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 05:10:40PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Is it simply subscribing to -dev and voicing the conversation there?
Of course not. But please, do that if you think it will help to steer
Gentoo to whatever
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 14 Sep 2011 11:25:23 Alan Mackenzie wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 05:10:40PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
Is it simply subscribing to -dev and voicing the conversation there?
Of course not. But
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:33:01 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer grim...@gmx.de
wrote:
If gentoo follows fedora on this mandatory initramfs trail, I'll
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 17:10:40 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
No, by you know what needs to be done I mean: code. Contribute.
Become a developer. Make shit happens the way you think it should
happen.
You're happy to
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
