Re: [gentoo-dev] Python setuptools/eggs
Anders Bruun Olsen wrote: But aren't eggs a bit against the Gentoo philosophy? I mean there are some eggs that contain precompiled C-extensions. Shouldn't it still be source builds that just somehow work with setuptools? We wouldn't use the precompiled C eggs. The main reason I'm looking at eggs so soon is because packages may start using them exclusively and we will have the choice of using them via portage or let people install them manually via easy_install. This happened with Rails. They have the source available but comes with no way to install it properly and they only support gems installations officially, so the gems eclass was born. Mail me off-list or join #gentoo-python if you're interested in working on the easy_install eclass, please. Should we move this off-list? I haven't worked with easy_install for about a month so I haven't got much to add, but I'm catching up on it tonight. Since nobody else on the Python team has spoken up, I think they may not be caught up either. I received a few mails from other interested people, and we're meeting on irc for now. Thanks, Rob -- Rob Cakebread Gentoo Linux Developer Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x96BA679B Key fingerprint = 5E1A 57A0 0FA6 939D 3258 8369 81C5 A17B 96BA 679B -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Glibc builds and --as-needed
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 07:56 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Simon Strandman wrote: > | I'm curious why --as-needed is disabled for glibc builds. It was first > | added over a year ago in one of the early 2.3.4 builds so is it still > | nessecary? > > I think it had something to do with breaking binutils 2.15.90 or > thereabouts. yes, a lot of people had older binutils/gcc at the time so we force disabled it in both glibc/gcc so people would stop bitching then we forgot about it -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Glibc builds and --as-needed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Simon Strandman wrote: | I'm curious why --as-needed is disabled for glibc builds. It was first | added over a year ago in one of the early 2.3.4 builds so is it still | nessecary? I think it had something to do with breaking binutils 2.15.90 or thereabouts. Thanks, Donnie -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDTFEcXVaO67S1rtsRAooQAKD8buG912d22x0jzzslse/spHF1mgCgpJG1 vcTYebI93Him56jpSE2R514= =pekT -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Glibc builds and --as-needed
Simon Strandman wrote: > I'm curious why --as-needed is disabled for glibc builds. It was first > added over a year ago in one of the early 2.3.4 builds so is it still > nessecary? > > I tried removing it and had no problems building glibc and I could see > that it was used when looking at the compile output. Then I tried > bootstraping from stage1 with --as-needed and neither my amd64 or x86 > has any problems completeing it. Perhaps this can be reconsidered? > Please file a bug. It'll be much easier for us to keep track of that way. Thanks, Mark signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 17:54 +0200, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > That gave me a good laugh. Oh well, anyway. What's "default"? As in > "recommended by the documentation"? Or "installed as dependency of > virtual/logger"? The documentation recommends syslog-ng, as that was requested by Release Engineering for 2005.0's release. As for virtual/logger, it installs metalog. I think the point is that they should match. It was also quite obvious after the comments on the thread, that this is one of those things that probably won't ever be solved by consensus. Is this not the exact thing that the Council is there to do, to make decisions that we cannot agree on ourselves? Yes, it is a minor decision. No, it doesn't really matter much. The main thrust of the whole thing is that they should be equal. > If the former: hump the GDP. I already did. You guys changed it to syslog-ng a while back. > If the latter: hump the baselayout team. What does baselayout have to do with this? > If both, try humping one of them at a time. Doing both just makes funny > pictures, but doesn't give much results. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Glibc builds and --as-needed
I'm curious why --as-needed is disabled for glibc builds. It was first added over a year ago in one of the early 2.3.4 builds so is it still nessecary? I tried removing it and had no problems building glibc and I could see that it was used when looking at the compile output. Then I tried bootstraping from stage1 with --as-needed and neither my amd64 or x86 has any problems completeing it. Perhaps this can be reconsidered? -- Simon Strandman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Tuesday 11 of October 2005 17:54 Sven Vermeulen wrote: > That gave me a good laugh. Oh well, anyway. What's "default"? As in > "recommended by the documentation"? Or "installed as dependency of > virtual/logger"? Both of that should be equal, but they aren't, see another -dev ML thread. Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth pgputyOpHUv3E.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 17:00:56 + Alec Joseph Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > FYI elog is implemented in CVS ( 2.1 ). When it will be released is > anyone's guess. 2.1? probably never, but elog will almost certainly be backported to the 2.0 branch. Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. pgpnS2lozzM05.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 09:00:57AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I'd like to see the council fight it out over^W^W^W^Wdiscuss which > logger should be the default. *lol* That gave me a good laugh. Oh well, anyway. What's "default"? As in "recommended by the documentation"? Or "installed as dependency of virtual/logger"? If the former: hump the GDP. If the latter: hump the baselayout team. If both, try humping one of them at a time. Doing both just makes funny pictures, but doesn't give much results. Wkr, Sven Vermeulen -- Gentoo Foundation Trustee | http://foundation.gentoo.org Gentoo Documentation Project Lead | http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gdp Gentoo Council Member The Gentoo Project <<< http://www.gentoo.org >>> pgporuI011pZB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
FYI elog is implemented in CVS ( 2.1 ). When it will be released is anyone's guess. Kevin F. Quinn wrote: On 11/10/2005 9:18:41, Dave Nebinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: This is probably the fifth time at least that I've been bitten by this... https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11359 [NEW FEATURE] pkg_postinst/pkg_preinst ewarn/einfo logging -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
On 11/10/2005 9:18:41, Dave Nebinger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > This is probably the fifth time at least that I've been bitten by this... https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11359 [NEW FEATURE] pkg_postinst/pkg_preinst ewarn/einfo logging -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
Well, there's enotice.http://dev.gentoo.org/~eldad/On 10/11/05, Carlos Silva <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 09:18 -0400, Dave Nebinger wrote:
> This is probably the fifth time at least that I've been bitten by this...>> Portage is great in that it manages compiles for a bulk of applications> (including dependencies) in one fell swoop.
>> Yesterday I emerged gnome - that was it, just gnome, and it took care of the> whole thing soup to nuts. Wahoo, and kudos to all of you who put in the> work.>> But here's my issue... In emerging one of the 101 packages missing on my
> system for gnome, a little blurb flew buy that should have caught my> attention, a message posted in the pkg_postinst() message indicating what I> should do now that my installation has completed.
>> That's well and good, but as it was one of only 101 other packages, that> message quickly gets lost in the shuffle.>> So here's the enhancement: have portage collect all of these kinds of messages
> and display them after all of the emerging has completed.>> So here's my proposed enhancement: Before the call to pkg_postinst(), set a> flag that causes einfo/ewarn/etc. to tee the output generated by the ebuild
> to /var/log/portage_postinst.log (or something configurable in make.conf,> whatever). Preface the first generated line with the ${P} so we know what> it's related to. After the pkg_postinst() method completes, clear the flag
> and other emerges can carry on as they need to.>> Had this kind of thing been in place, after emerging 101 packages I could go> to the postinst log and see everything that I had to do, including the little
> blurb that I had missed before.>> Yes, I know folks are going to say that you can enable portage logging and> look for messages that need to be taken care of. But I just emerged 101 new> packages, have many emerge -ud worlds, etc. resulting in almost 2000 files
> out there in /var/log/portage. Talk about the needle in the haystack,> there's not even some specific keywords I could grep on to hit on the> relevant information.>> Understandably I don't know what you all will say about this. It seems like a
> great idea to me, and wouldn't appear to come with all the political issues> that the 'extending the ebuild meta data' or some other issues that have come> up recently.>> But I'll leave it to the rest of you to decide...
I could be wrong, and if i am, someone from the portage team to correctme, but i think this will come in the next major version of the portagealong with the tool elog.--Carlos "r3pek" Silva
Gentoo Developer (kernel/amd64/mobile-phone)-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-Version: GnuPG v1.4.1-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux)iD8DBQBDS8hAttk+BQds59QRAmA1AJ9B5k3jYh6CnYKdO1hb4oLXBOzjggCffaLDuNSPq9C8xxPpG4bBiH42VC0=
=mWCg-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 09:18 -0400, Dave Nebinger wrote:
> This is probably the fifth time at least that I've been bitten by this...
>
> Portage is great in that it manages compiles for a bulk of applications
> (including dependencies) in one fell swoop.
>
> Yesterday I emerged gnome - that was it, just gnome, and it took care of the
> whole thing soup to nuts. Wahoo, and kudos to all of you who put in the
> work.
>
> But here's my issue... In emerging one of the 101 packages missing on my
> system for gnome, a little blurb flew buy that should have caught my
> attention, a message posted in the pkg_postinst() message indicating what I
> should do now that my installation has completed.
>
> That's well and good, but as it was one of only 101 other packages, that
> message quickly gets lost in the shuffle.
>
> So here's the enhancement: have portage collect all of these kinds of
> messages
> and display them after all of the emerging has completed.
>
> So here's my proposed enhancement: Before the call to pkg_postinst(), set a
> flag that causes einfo/ewarn/etc. to tee the output generated by the ebuild
> to /var/log/portage_postinst.log (or something configurable in make.conf,
> whatever). Preface the first generated line with the ${P} so we know what
> it's related to. After the pkg_postinst() method completes, clear the flag
> and other emerges can carry on as they need to.
>
> Had this kind of thing been in place, after emerging 101 packages I could go
> to the postinst log and see everything that I had to do, including the little
> blurb that I had missed before.
>
> Yes, I know folks are going to say that you can enable portage logging and
> look for messages that need to be taken care of. But I just emerged 101 new
> packages, have many emerge -ud worlds, etc. resulting in almost 2000 files
> out there in /var/log/portage. Talk about the needle in the haystack,
> there's not even some specific keywords I could grep on to hit on the
> relevant information.
>
> Understandably I don't know what you all will say about this. It seems like
> a
> great idea to me, and wouldn't appear to come with all the political issues
> that the 'extending the ebuild meta data' or some other issues that have come
> up recently.
>
> But I'll leave it to the rest of you to decide...
I could be wrong, and if i am, someone from the portage team to correct
me, but i think this will come in the next major version of the portage
along with the tool elog.
--
Carlos "r3pek" Silva
Gentoo Developer (kernel/amd64/mobile-phone)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-p2p needs more developers
On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 11:08:30AM +0300, Petteri Räty wrote: > I added myself to net-p2p to look after some java packages if I have the > time [...] nice to hear that. any help appreciated;] -- . . Marcin Kryczek . . . . . . . . . . . .RLU: #316599 . . . . Gentoo Linux Developer. . . . . . .mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .PGP: 0xD6CFCCF1 . . . Key Fingerprint: EE8F E832 54E4 2456 C582 5B32 E10F EEDC D6CF CCF1 . pgpSywkspKccj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 14:18, Dave Nebinger wrote: > So here's the enhancement: have portage collect all of these kinds of > messages and display them after all of the emerging has completed. > See bug 11359 - this is an old enhancement request... I would also like to see something implemented in portage. -- Gentoo Linux Developer Scientific Applications | AMD64 | KDE | net-proxy pgphbeL9CDsbf.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Just another portage enhancement idea...
This is probably the fifth time at least that I've been bitten by this...
Portage is great in that it manages compiles for a bulk of applications
(including dependencies) in one fell swoop.
Yesterday I emerged gnome - that was it, just gnome, and it took care of the
whole thing soup to nuts. Wahoo, and kudos to all of you who put in the
work.
But here's my issue... In emerging one of the 101 packages missing on my
system for gnome, a little blurb flew buy that should have caught my
attention, a message posted in the pkg_postinst() message indicating what I
should do now that my installation has completed.
That's well and good, but as it was one of only 101 other packages, that
message quickly gets lost in the shuffle.
So here's the enhancement: have portage collect all of these kinds of messages
and display them after all of the emerging has completed.
So here's my proposed enhancement: Before the call to pkg_postinst(), set a
flag that causes einfo/ewarn/etc. to tee the output generated by the ebuild
to /var/log/portage_postinst.log (or something configurable in make.conf,
whatever). Preface the first generated line with the ${P} so we know what
it's related to. After the pkg_postinst() method completes, clear the flag
and other emerges can carry on as they need to.
Had this kind of thing been in place, after emerging 101 packages I could go
to the postinst log and see everything that I had to do, including the little
blurb that I had missed before.
Yes, I know folks are going to say that you can enable portage logging and
look for messages that need to be taken care of. But I just emerged 101 new
packages, have many emerge -ud worlds, etc. resulting in almost 2000 files
out there in /var/log/portage. Talk about the needle in the haystack,
there's not even some specific keywords I could grep on to hit on the
relevant information.
Understandably I don't know what you all will say about this. It seems like a
great idea to me, and wouldn't appear to come with all the political issues
that the 'extending the ebuild meta data' or some other issues that have come
up recently.
But I'll leave it to the rest of you to decide...
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 12:32 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:47:08 +0200 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or > | whatever it would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due > | to the constant flames... > > The problem is that no-one has put together a proper specification for > it yet. There's actually a group of us working on this. If you're interested in helping out, feel free to shoot me an email. I'm working on getting a group together to brainstorm up ideas to introduce a GLEP that makes things a bit easier on developers by reducing the required reading. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 10:47:08 +0200 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or | whatever it would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due | to the constant flames... The problem is that no-one has put together a proper specification for it yet. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Shell tools, Fluxbox, Cron) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm pgpVevfC3rZYc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
Jakub Moc wrote: 11.10.2005, 10:52:35, Jan Kundrát wrote: On Tuesday 11 of October 2005 10:47 Jakub Moc wrote: Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or whatever it would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due to the constant flames... Nothing, of course. But how would you prevent flames from happening on a new list? :-) Cheers, -jkt Hint: read-only ml? :=) Bad idea, we have that already with -announce (only a handful of people can post there IIRC). Better let Reply-To and similar headers point back to -core or -dev (and/or reject any messages with present In-Reply-To headers). Marius -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Tuesday 11 of October 2005 10:55 Jakub Moc wrote: > Hint: read-only ml? :=) And who will submit the news? Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth pgpiIonAFZ408.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
11.10.2005, 10:52:35, Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Tuesday 11 of October 2005 10:47 Jakub Moc wrote: >> Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or whatever it >> would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due to the constant >> flames... > Nothing, of course. But how would you prevent flames from happening on a new > list? :-) > Cheers, > -jkt Hint: read-only ml? :=) -- Best regards, Jakub Moc pgpVNyY7bkUBI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Tuesday 11 of October 2005 10:47 Jakub Moc wrote: > Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or whatever it > would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due to the constant > flames... Nothing, of course. But how would you prevent flames from happening on a new list? :-) Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth pgpvGlCo0er6T.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
11.10.2005, 10:39:56, Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Monday 10 of October 2005 23:36 Marcin Kryczek wrote: >> council could decide if it's worth to try and put some herd (GDP?) to be >> responsible for it. > Uh, and what *exactly* do you mean by "be responsible for it"? I mean, are we > supposed to watch every possible communication channel or would the people > involved submit bugs to us about newly made decisions? > Anyway, what about some weekly message to -core? > Cheers, > -jkt Bleh, what's wrong w/ the idea to create gentoo-dev-annouce or whatever it would be called? Many people gave up on reading -core due to the constant flames... -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) pgp6BGNdGDmp5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 23:36:36 +0200 Marcin Kryczek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | someone (sorry - but i can't remind who exactly and i can't find that > | mail) mentiond it'd be nice to have some ~weekly summary of important > | (for developers) decisions made in community. > | i think it's good idea, becouse there's often just to many mails to > | read (well - we can fix some bugs in that time;>) and we can miss > | something we certainly shouldn't:| > | council could decide if it's worth to try and put some herd (GDP?) to > | be responsible for it. There are many ways to fix this. Forcing some group to do it is not a solution. One work in progress (that will be proposed in a GLEP) is to change the current ML system to add a dev announcement list that would let everyone know of current discussions and decisions without requiring to follow endless threads. That may cut the "required reading" sufficiently so that a weekly summary is not necessary. > Isn't the idea that someone writes out a draft GLEP and gets it > discussed on -dev (and repeats said process until everyone is happy > with the GLEP) *before* pushing things to the council? It's certainly the idea. It should be at least put into words and discussed in the community before being voted on. -- Koon -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council meeting Thursday October 13th
On Monday 10 of October 2005 23:36 Marcin Kryczek wrote: > council could decide if it's worth to try and put some herd (GDP?) to be > responsible for it. Uh, and what *exactly* do you mean by "be responsible for it"? I mean, are we supposed to watch every possible communication channel or would the people involved submit bugs to us about newly made decisions? Anyway, what about some weekly message to -core? Cheers, -jkt -- cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth pgpnU94MFs28A.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-p2p needs more developers
Marcin Kryczek wrote: > hi, > currently i'm the only active developer in net-p2p herd, which is really > uncomfortable for me (not mentioning about situation if i'll be away for > few weeks). i need at least 2 developers (preferably with java knowledge, > becouse i do not know java at all, but it's not obligate) for help with > testing and maintaining stuff. we already have 76 application in net-p2p > and only few of them are maintained by individual developers. we also have > many requests for new packages, but i won't add anything into tree as far > as i'm alone here. I added myself to net-p2p to look after some java packages if I have the time, but as Java is also understaffed... I will at least try to bring net-p2p packages to adhere to our java policy. It would be great to recruit a dev or two but I too am still too new to recruit any one. Regards, Petteri Räty signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
