Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > What does everyone else think about this. Is portage a major blocker > > of progress or not so much? > > As said above, details are major blockers of progress. Can you elaborate on this? Do you just mean that there are many small things that are blocking Gentoo's progress? - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> >> Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > >> at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > >> things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > >> be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > >> is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > >> to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > >> keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > >> treading water? > >> > >> > > Is this a continuation? > > http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 > > > > > Yeah, it's me again. > > > > >>> I have a pretty small desktop system syncing weekly, and 2 others > >>> syncing from it. Every week I see upgrades in many packages, from > >>> system to desktop applications. I have 3 stable systems, with > >>> different roles (a server, a workstation and one in "dumb terminal > >>> with a web browser" mode), and they're completing 2 years of constant, > >>> careful and flawless upgrades. > >>> > >>> You don't need statistics, or reports, or whatever. This list is the > >>> living proof of Gentoo existence and the constant flow of information > >>> regarding it. Another good point is that BGO (bugs.gentoo.org) is also > >>> active, so, development is constant. > >>> > >>> I don't wanna sound rude, but this discussion is almost the same as > >>> that one, as unproductive and "starving for attention" too (but with a > >>> nice title), and this is the third edition. Don't get me wrong, but > >>> what exactly is the point of starting this threads? If you're worried > >>> about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, don't be, Gentoo is alive and > >>> kicking. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> I would agree Daniel, > >> > >> There is always stuff rollin' in from all the gentoo lists... It's > >> almost ridiculous how many discussions and threads are going on in > >> there. In that respect, I completely agree that the Gentoo project is > >> far from idle. For another snapshot of just how active gentoo is, check > >> out the IRC channels (#gentoo) and as Daniel said, bugs.gentoo.org. > >> > >> "Don't get me wrong, but what exactly is the point of starting this > >> threads? If you're worried about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, > >> don't be, Gentoo is alive and kicking." - Daniel > >> > >> It's true :) > >> > >> Feel free to post any ideas you have to enhance Gentoo's base > >> functionality to the list though, I think you've roused everyone's > >> curiosity Grant :D > >> > > > > My ideas aren't really important unless they're everyone else's ideas > > too. I'm sure a lot of us would like to see the same kind of stuff > > happen. The weird thing is, none of it is happening. This must be > > due to a lack of devs or dev interest right? I can't understand that. > > Gentoo should be just getting started at this point, and yet people > > seem to think it's finished. Sooner or later other distros will > > accomplish things that make Gentoo seem inferior. Ease of use is a > > good example, but it's just an example. Advancements will continue > > and Gentoo will be left in the dust if it doesn't advance also. > > > > - Grant > > > Good point as far as Gentoo just beginning. However, the portage system > is very powerful, mature, and fully featured as is the stage3 used as I was under the same impression, but I'm hearing something different from some of the people on this list. It sounds like portage is not the facilitator I thought it was and is instead blocking progress. > the foundation for the base install. After that, it's up to the software > developers for each individual package which decides how "new" the > package is as well as the administrator of the system (You) whether or > not to use "ACCEPT_KEYWORDS" in order to pull the latest version (if > masked). Granted, it is also up to the Gentoo maintainers to make sure > the packages are ported correctly and as soon as possible. Is this > (portage maintainers) what you are referring too? Or are you referring The maintenance of some packages seems to be lagging, but there are others that are maintained very well.. > to Gentoo in a more broad sense as stagnating? If so, could you provide > some examples in which you see stagnation or less activity than you > believe we should be seeing. As I was saying before, I think additional removable layers should be built on top of Gentoo's foundation. Right now the foundation is great and we need to put that to good use. Is the current state of portage preventing this from happening? Is paludis the cure? - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Dec 16, 2007 2:09 AM, Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do you have a list of significant improvements you want implemented? > There were gaping holes in linux's abilities in the past. These > problems have been fixed. Change simply for the sake of change is a > relic of the Windows era. Ya, but let me remind you that Gentoo did not reach the perfect stage of "nothing more can be done to improve it". IMHO, there is one major project that Gentoo should start. Gentoo is a distro -I don't remember who told us Gentoo is not a distro, but it is- because there is something called portage tree. It is not just an LFS with a package manager (to do that, please read http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ and install a portage tarball), because Gentoo provides thousands of packages that are maintained by gentoo devs. No more confusion, Gentoo IS a distro. Well, Grant -among others- is wondering about Gentoo future, and some difficulties that Gentoo currently faces. I love the efforts of some gentooers to claim that everything is okay in Gentoo world, they may skip the goodbye posts of all the leaving developers on the dev list, or may ignore the understaffed teams, but well, Grant, you are not stupid to wonder about future and your questions are not silly. Some improvement that can be done ? Someone reports difficulties for non-dev to become official dev or contribute. I think about something that EVERY linux distro lacks today. I am dreaming about a clear package tree representation. I mean, there is http://packages.gentoo.org/ for users to know which package are at disposal on which architectures, and so on. Let's imagine what a distro web site should provide... (not only on the web site but also integrated into the pkg management software) the categorized packages list, with search features of course, with ALL the information attached to each package, like the needs for maintainers as an example. There is neither announcements about the future ebuild releases, nor the Gentoo policy about this package... I think that this kind of information can be a good interface between official devs and the community to encourage new people to become devs, or to simply provide a better view on the current status of the portage tree and the near future. The package maintenance is a really hard task that requires lots of resources. OK. But there is a lack of resources. Is there actually nothing to do ? Is the automation of the package built with all USE flags combination and tests already done ? Are you sure that there is no process improvement possible (about the non-regression tests delivered with ebuilds) ? There is just one point on which I am sure it is hard for non-dev to know how things turn on. Gal' -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Grant wrote: >> Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking >> at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like >> things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to >> be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there >> is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second >> to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to >> keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep >> treading water? >> >> > Is this a continuation? > http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 > > Yeah, it's me again. >>> I have a pretty small desktop system syncing weekly, and 2 others >>> syncing from it. Every week I see upgrades in many packages, from >>> system to desktop applications. I have 3 stable systems, with >>> different roles (a server, a workstation and one in "dumb terminal >>> with a web browser" mode), and they're completing 2 years of constant, >>> careful and flawless upgrades. >>> >>> You don't need statistics, or reports, or whatever. This list is the >>> living proof of Gentoo existence and the constant flow of information >>> regarding it. Another good point is that BGO (bugs.gentoo.org) is also >>> active, so, development is constant. >>> >>> I don't wanna sound rude, but this discussion is almost the same as >>> that one, as unproductive and "starving for attention" too (but with a >>> nice title), and this is the third edition. Don't get me wrong, but >>> what exactly is the point of starting this threads? If you're worried >>> about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, don't be, Gentoo is alive and >>> kicking. >>> >>> >>> >> I would agree Daniel, >> >> There is always stuff rollin' in from all the gentoo lists... It's >> almost ridiculous how many discussions and threads are going on in >> there. In that respect, I completely agree that the Gentoo project is >> far from idle. For another snapshot of just how active gentoo is, check >> out the IRC channels (#gentoo) and as Daniel said, bugs.gentoo.org. >> >> "Don't get me wrong, but what exactly is the point of starting this >> threads? If you're worried about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, >> don't be, Gentoo is alive and kicking." - Daniel >> >> It's true :) >> >> Feel free to post any ideas you have to enhance Gentoo's base >> functionality to the list though, I think you've roused everyone's >> curiosity Grant :D >> > > My ideas aren't really important unless they're everyone else's ideas > too. I'm sure a lot of us would like to see the same kind of stuff > happen. The weird thing is, none of it is happening. This must be > due to a lack of devs or dev interest right? I can't understand that. > Gentoo should be just getting started at this point, and yet people > seem to think it's finished. Sooner or later other distros will > accomplish things that make Gentoo seem inferior. Ease of use is a > good example, but it's just an example. Advancements will continue > and Gentoo will be left in the dust if it doesn't advance also. > > - Grant > Good point as far as Gentoo just beginning. However, the portage system is very powerful, mature, and fully featured as is the stage3 used as the foundation for the base install. After that, it's up to the software developers for each individual package which decides how "new" the package is as well as the administrator of the system (You) whether or not to use "ACCEPT_KEYWORDS" in order to pull the latest version (if masked). Granted, it is also up to the Gentoo maintainers to make sure the packages are ported correctly and as soon as possible. Is this (portage maintainers) what you are referring too? Or are you referring to Gentoo in a more broad sense as stagnating? If so, could you provide some examples in which you see stagnation or less activity than you believe we should be seeing. Thanks Grant, Christopher -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On (17/12/07 11:29) Ralf Stephan wrote: > > What does everyone else think about this. Is portage a major blocker > > of progress or not so much? > > As said above, details are major blockers of progress. > > On the other hand, when I switched to paludis, 100 MB > of unnecessary packages suddenly were available to delete. > So, paludis must do something right where portage didn't. > > > ralf > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > Hi, IMHO paludis has (could affort to have) a clear goal right from the start. It's devs has a long experience with pros&cons of portage/ebuilds. They (mainly) wrote PMS (portage package specification) on which to standartize some not so well established practicies (was devmanual). Beside that portage has been maintained by at least 4-5 very skilled people, butthis resulted in some messy/hackish code (quite unevitable i believe). Paludis was build (by it's authors) on portage experience, using a stable base and clear goals (all quite realistic to implement in relatively short time). But having a choice for a package manager is a *very good* thing to have. Just my point of view. Rumen pgpWpg616kODy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> What does everyone else think about this. Is portage a major blocker > of progress or not so much? As said above, details are major blockers of progress. On the other hand, when I switched to paludis, 100 MB of unnecessary packages suddenly were available to delete. So, paludis must do something right where portage didn't. ralf -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > > > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is > > > > Portage. There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in > > > > it is hard because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of > > > > activity in the tree but new desired features cannot be used in the > > > > tree until Portage supports them. It also doesn't make matters better > > > > that over the years all sorts of weird hacks (that now have to be > > > > supported) have been added to the tree instead of waiting for proper > > > > solutions. Most people who are capable of helping to improve Portage > > > > just don't want to touch it. > > > > > > Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's > > > continued progress? > > > > Actually I guess that's pretty much exactly what you said. I didn't > > realize portage is where the problem lies. In fact, I thought we were > > all still proud of portage I'm going to think about this some. > > It all depends on what kind of features you're interested in. The features I > happen to be interested in requires ebuild changes (which means that me using > another package manager doesn't help) *and* requires package manager support > before said ebuild changes can happen. Therefore for me Portage is a > blocker... What does everyone else think about this. Is portage a major blocker of progress or not so much? - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote: > On Saturday 15 December 2007 20:00:54 Grant wrote: > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is Portage. There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in it is hard because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of activity in the tree but new desired features cannot be used in the tree until Portage supports them. It also doesn't make matters better that over the years all sorts of weird hacks (that now have to be supported) have been added to the tree instead of waiting for proper solutions. Most people who are capable of helping to improve Portage just don't want to touch it. >>> Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's >>> continued progress? >>> >> Actually I guess that's pretty much exactly what you said. I didn't >> realize portage is where the problem lies. In fact, I thought we were >> all still proud of portage I'm going to think about this some. >> > > It all depends on what kind of features you're interested in. The features I > happen to be interested in requires ebuild changes (which means that me using > another package manager doesn't help) *and* requires package manager support > before said ebuild changes can happen. Therefore for me Portage is a > blocker... > > I read a link provided earlier about Plaudis, (sp?). It seems that Portage has a lot of hacks in it, according to what I read anyway. Is that true? Also, is it being wrote with python hurting portage as for as the program itself? If it is, why are they not trying to switch to something else? If C++ is better, then putting off changing is only going to get harder as time goes on. In case you can't tell, I'm not a programmer. Last time I did programming, it was on a Vic-20. LOL Just curious. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Saturday 15 December 2007 20:00:54 Grant wrote: > > > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is > > > Portage. There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in > > > it is hard because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of > > > activity in the tree but new desired features cannot be used in the > > > tree until Portage supports them. It also doesn't make matters better > > > that over the years all sorts of weird hacks (that now have to be > > > supported) have been added to the tree instead of waiting for proper > > > solutions. Most people who are capable of helping to improve Portage > > > just don't want to touch it. > > > > Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's > > continued progress? > > Actually I guess that's pretty much exactly what you said. I didn't > realize portage is where the problem lies. In fact, I thought we were > all still proud of portage I'm going to think about this some. It all depends on what kind of features you're interested in. The features I happen to be interested in requires ebuild changes (which means that me using another package manager doesn't help) *and* requires package manager support before said ebuild changes can happen. Therefore for me Portage is a blocker... -- Bo Andresen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Neil Bothwick wrote: >>> Maybe his/her laptop doesn't stand the >>> thermal output of its CPU when emerging or maybe he/she's the >>> administrator of a large company's network, trying to move every >>> computer system to Gentoo. >> Check out distccd! > How does that help? Either every machine on the network spends time > compiling when it should be earning its keep, or they all pass all the > load to a compiler system that has to recompile the same code over and > over for each computer on the network. Using that computer to build > binary packages that the others can install is so much more efficient. It does help in the case that Florian mentioned, also quoted at the top, about the laptop... I agree that if you are going to build the same thing for every computer it makes sense to do it just once. I was thinking more about the laptop... -- Randy Barlow http://electronsweatshop.com -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 07:48:12AM -0800, Grant wrote > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > things being improved as quickly as possible. One item (amongst many) that chased me away from Windows was the upgrade treadmill... 1993 Win3.1 1994 Win3.11 1995 Win95 1996 Win95OSr2 1997 And on the 1997th year, Go^H^H Gates rested 1998 Win98 1999 Win98SE 2000 WinME and Win2K 2001 WinXP Remember that Gentoo is a linux distro, meaning that it is an implementation based on Linus Torvalds' baby. You may be thinking back to the early days of Kernel 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, etc, etc. For whatever reason, 2.6 has been around for 4 years, with no signs of being replaced. Gentoo can't do much about that, or do you want to fork the linux kernel? There have been a lot of "minor" improvements that, taken together, have led to major overall improvement. Basically, linux has caught up to Windows, indeed 64-bit linux has been better than 64-Windows for the past year. > The concept is second to none, the execution of that concept is > fantastic, but it needs to keep moving forward. Do you have a list of significant improvements you want implemented? There were gaping holes in linux's abilities in the past. These problems have been fixed. Change simply for the sake of change is a relic of the Windows era. -- Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'm not repeating myself I'm an X Window user... I'm an ex-Windows-user -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:41:21 -0500, Randy Barlow wrote: > > Maybe his/her laptop doesn't stand the > > thermal output of its CPU when emerging or maybe he/she's the > > administrator of a large company's network, trying to move every > > computer system to Gentoo. > > Check out distccd! How does that help? Either every machine on the network spends time compiling when it should be earning its keep, or they all pass all the load to a compiler system that has to recompile the same code over and over for each computer on the network. Using that computer to build binary packages that the others can install is so much more efficient. -- Neil Bothwick Behaviorist psychology -- pulling habits out of rats signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is Portage. > > There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in it is hard > > because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of activity in the tree > > but new desired features cannot be used in the tree until Portage supports > > them. It also doesn't make matters better that over the years all sorts of > > weird hacks (that now have to be supported) have been added to the tree > > instead of waiting for proper solutions. Most people who are capable of > > helping to improve Portage just don't want to touch it. > > Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's > continued progress? Actually I guess that's pretty much exactly what you said. I didn't realize portage is where the problem lies. In fact, I thought we were all still proud of portage I'm going to think about this some. - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > So, what would need to happen for one of these projects to take off > > would be one or more people to be in charge of it and organize it, and > > they recruit as many people as possible to work on the project along > > with them? > > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is Portage. > There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in it is hard > because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of activity in the tree > but new desired features cannot be used in the tree until Portage supports > them. It also doesn't make matters better that over the years all sorts of > weird hacks (that now have to be supported) have been added to the tree > instead of waiting for proper solutions. Most people who are capable of > helping to improve Portage just don't want to touch it. Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's continued progress? > > Does that recruitment generally take the form of volunteers finding the > > project as opposed to the project finding volunteers? Any light to shed on > > this process for me? > > If there's one thing we definitely don't need it's more clueless people who > become developers just because they claim they want to do something. Being > stalled is better than major screw ups that hurt everyone and than moving in > the wrong direction. I don't have aspirations of becoming a developer if that's what you mean. Thanks though. - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Florian Philipp wrote: > Maybe his/her laptop doesn't stand the > thermal output of its CPU when emerging or maybe he/she's the > administrator of a large company's network, trying to move every > computer system to Gentoo. Check out distccd! -- Randy Barlow http://electronsweatshop.com -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Saturday 15 December 2007 15:05:28 Grant wrote: > > Neil correctly translated my pseudo-English to what I actually meant. I > > don't want to make Portage binary based. I just want to make Portage's > > binary package support more conveniently usable on big networks. Even eclasses in the tree don't have any sort of checksums and they aren't even included in binary packages either... > I don't think there is any shortage of great ideas here. Can we get > into specifics on how projects are born and become successful? > > So, what would need to happen for one of these projects to take off > would be one or more people to be in charge of it and organize it, and > they recruit as many people as possible to work on the project along > with them? The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is Portage. There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in it is hard because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of activity in the tree but new desired features cannot be used in the tree until Portage supports them. It also doesn't make matters better that over the years all sorts of weird hacks (that now have to be supported) have been added to the tree instead of waiting for proper solutions. Most people who are capable of helping to improve Portage just don't want to touch it. > Does that recruitment generally take the form of volunteers finding the > project as opposed to the project finding volunteers? Any light to shed on > this process for me? If there's one thing we definitely don't need it's more clueless people who become developers just because they claim they want to do something. Being stalled is better than major screw ups that hurt everyone and than moving in the wrong direction. -- Bo Andresen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > > > That is when you compile it on another machine then install it on the > > > > laptop. The -K option comes to mind here. > > > > > > > > > > Which is what I think the OP was talking about. If you install one of the > > > *-bin packages from portage, you are protected by the checksums in the > > > ebuild digest. But if you create a binary package repository, there is > > > currently no means of applying the same protection. So if you are > > > administering machines at different locations and want to keep a single > > > binary package repository so you only build once (remember, production > > > servers may not have gcc installed), there is no means of checking that > > > the downloaded package has not been tampered with. This protection > > > applies to ebuilds and distfiles but cannot be applied to packages you > > > build yourself. > > > > > > > But he was responding to me mentioning Redhat and Mandrake which are > > binary based. Maybe I took his original point wrong. > > Exactly :) > Neil correctly translated my pseudo-English to what I actually meant. I > don't want to make Portage binary based. I just want to make Portage's > binary package support more conveniently usable on big networks. I don't think there is any shortage of great ideas here. Can we get into specifics on how projects are born and become successful? So, what would need to happen for one of these projects to take off would be one or more people to be in charge of it and organize it, and they recruit as many people as possible to work on the project along with them? Does that recruitment generally take the form of volunteers finding the project as opposed to the project finding volunteers? Any light to shed on this process for me? - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 07:06 -0600, Dale wrote: > Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:44:55 -0600, Dale wrote: > > > > > > > That is when you compile it on another machine then install it on the > > > laptop. The -K option comes to mind here. > > > > > > > Which is what I think the OP was talking about. If you install one of the > > *-bin packages from portage, you are protected by the checksums in the > > ebuild digest. But if you create a binary package repository, there is > > currently no means of applying the same protection. So if you are > > administering machines at different locations and want to keep a single > > binary package repository so you only build once (remember, production > > servers may not have gcc installed), there is no means of checking that > > the downloaded package has not been tampered with. This protection > > applies to ebuilds and distfiles but cannot be applied to packages you > > build yourself. > > > > But he was responding to me mentioning Redhat and Mandrake which are > binary based. Maybe I took his original point wrong. Exactly :) Neil correctly translated my pseudo-English to what I actually meant. I don't want to make Portage binary based. I just want to make Portage's binary package support more conveniently usable on big networks. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:44:55 -0600, Dale wrote: > > >> That is when you compile it on another machine then install it on the >> laptop. The -K option comes to mind here. >> > > Which is what I think the OP was talking about. If you install one of the > *-bin packages from portage, you are protected by the checksums in the > ebuild digest. But if you create a binary package repository, there is > currently no means of applying the same protection. So if you are > administering machines at different locations and want to keep a single > binary package repository so you only build once (remember, production > servers may not have gcc installed), there is no means of checking that > the downloaded package has not been tampered with. This protection > applies to ebuilds and distfiles but cannot be applied to packages you > build yourself. > But he was responding to me mentioning Redhat and Mandrake which are binary based. Maybe I took his original point wrong. > >> I also think that the "choice" is in what you install as far as programs >> and the options they have available. Gentoo is Linux from Scratch with >> a serious package manager. "Choice" is not about having binaries or >> not. Also keep in mind that if a binary has something compiled in that >> you don't want or need, you are stuck with it and its dependencies. >> > > This is not about precompiled packages from a distro. Portage already has > the mechanism for "build once, install many", it is just lacking some of > the safeguards at the install stage that are present for the build stage. > > > True, but I was comparing to distros that are binary based not that you compile yourself. Again, the Redhat and Mandrake type of thing. I wish I had a laptop sometimes. Then sometimes I'm glad I have my desktop. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Saturday 15 December 2007 03:35:51 Grant wrote: > My ideas aren't really important unless they're everyone else's ideas > too. What is it exactly you want to achieve by starting these pointless threads? -- Bo Andresen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 03:44:55 -0600, Dale wrote: > That is when you compile it on another machine then install it on the > laptop. The -K option comes to mind here. Which is what I think the OP was talking about. If you install one of the *-bin packages from portage, you are protected by the checksums in the ebuild digest. But if you create a binary package repository, there is currently no means of applying the same protection. So if you are administering machines at different locations and want to keep a single binary package repository so you only build once (remember, production servers may not have gcc installed), there is no means of checking that the downloaded package has not been tampered with. This protection applies to ebuilds and distfiles but cannot be applied to packages you build yourself. > I also think that the "choice" is in what you install as far as programs > and the options they have available. Gentoo is Linux from Scratch with > a serious package manager. "Choice" is not about having binaries or > not. Also keep in mind that if a binary has something compiled in that > you don't want or need, you are stuck with it and its dependencies. This is not about precompiled packages from a distro. Portage already has the mechanism for "build once, install many", it is just lacking some of the safeguards at the install stage that are present for the build stage. -- Neil Bothwick Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > I love gentoo and can't settle for anything else. What can I do to > > make sure development doesn't stop? > > Let me in on that. What can I do too? Help out with bugfixing by submitting patches or even just confirming bugs and supplying needed details? Join testing teams? Join the Weekly News team? Is it really so difficult to see where there is something to do? If yes, wouldn't it be the first step to learn about how it all works? ralf -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Florian Philipp wrote: > On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 18:13 -0600, Dale wrote: > >> Florian Philipp wrote: >> >>> Okay, here it goes: >>> >>> I think we could need a better support for binary packages. >>> There was a thread in here a few months ago about how to offer binary >>> packages for customers. As far as I remember the problem was (and still >>> is) that there is no easy way to check the packages for corruption >>> (trojans, stuff like that). >>> >>> >> I know some things are only available as a binary but Gentoo is about >> compiling your own packages. Binaries are for Redhat, Mandrake and >> such. I moved away from that for good reason. >> >> > > As far as I know Gentoo is all about choice. Shouldn't the user have the > choice to use binary packages? Maybe his/her laptop doesn't stand the > thermal output of its CPU when emerging or maybe he/she's the > administrator of a large company's network, trying to move every > computer system to Gentoo. > > If you want Gentoo to grow and prosper, you must accept that there are > people who don't want or are not able to compile every piece of software > but still want to use Gentoo. > > Just my two cents. > > -Florian Philipp > That is when you compile it on another machine then install it on the laptop. The -K option comes to mind here. I also think that the "choice" is in what you install as far as programs and the options they have available. Gentoo is Linux from Scratch with a serious package manager. "Choice" is not about having binaries or not. Also keep in mind that if a binary has something compiled in that you don't want or need, you are stuck with it and its dependencies. If you compile your own, you have choices. This and dependency he** is why I switched from Mandrake, now known as Mandriva or something like that. My two cents. Dale :-) :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 18:13 -0600, Dale wrote: > Florian Philipp wrote: > > > > Okay, here it goes: > > > > I think we could need a better support for binary packages. > > There was a thread in here a few months ago about how to offer binary > > packages for customers. As far as I remember the problem was (and still > > is) that there is no easy way to check the packages for corruption > > (trojans, stuff like that). > > > > I know some things are only available as a binary but Gentoo is about > compiling your own packages. Binaries are for Redhat, Mandrake and > such. I moved away from that for good reason. > As far as I know Gentoo is all about choice. Shouldn't the user have the choice to use binary packages? Maybe his/her laptop doesn't stand the thermal output of its CPU when emerging or maybe he/she's the administrator of a large company's network, trying to move every computer system to Gentoo. If you want Gentoo to grow and prosper, you must accept that there are people who don't want or are not able to compile every piece of software but still want to use Gentoo. Just my two cents. -Florian Philipp signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > treading water? > > >>> Is this a continuation? > >>> http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 > >>> > >> Yeah, it's me again. > >> > >> > > > > I have a pretty small desktop system syncing weekly, and 2 others > > syncing from it. Every week I see upgrades in many packages, from > > system to desktop applications. I have 3 stable systems, with > > different roles (a server, a workstation and one in "dumb terminal > > with a web browser" mode), and they're completing 2 years of constant, > > careful and flawless upgrades. > > > > You don't need statistics, or reports, or whatever. This list is the > > living proof of Gentoo existence and the constant flow of information > > regarding it. Another good point is that BGO (bugs.gentoo.org) is also > > active, so, development is constant. > > > > I don't wanna sound rude, but this discussion is almost the same as > > that one, as unproductive and "starving for attention" too (but with a > > nice title), and this is the third edition. Don't get me wrong, but > > what exactly is the point of starting this threads? If you're worried > > about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, don't be, Gentoo is alive and > > kicking. > > > > > I would agree Daniel, > > There is always stuff rollin' in from all the gentoo lists... It's > almost ridiculous how many discussions and threads are going on in > there. In that respect, I completely agree that the Gentoo project is > far from idle. For another snapshot of just how active gentoo is, check > out the IRC channels (#gentoo) and as Daniel said, bugs.gentoo.org. > > "Don't get me wrong, but what exactly is the point of starting this > threads? If you're worried about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, > don't be, Gentoo is alive and kicking." - Daniel > > It's true :) > > Feel free to post any ideas you have to enhance Gentoo's base > functionality to the list though, I think you've roused everyone's > curiosity Grant :D My ideas aren't really important unless they're everyone else's ideas too. I'm sure a lot of us would like to see the same kind of stuff happen. The weird thing is, none of it is happening. This must be due to a lack of devs or dev interest right? I can't understand that. Gentoo should be just getting started at this point, and yet people seem to think it's finished. Sooner or later other distros will accomplish things that make Gentoo seem inferior. Ease of use is a good example, but it's just an example. Advancements will continue and Gentoo will be left in the dust if it doesn't advance also. - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules]
7v5w7go9ub0o wrote: > My concerns with this, other than my abilities, are: > 1. Showing proper respect to the guy who pioneered the effort to date, > and who may simply be out of town. (This disrespect would be alleviated > if there was an official policy encouraging "volunteer ebuilds".) It's not disrespectful, IMO, to do something that you don't see getting done. Especially since it's less work for another guy. I wouldn't worry about that point. > 2. He won't be there to proofread my work anyway, so therefor my ebuild > would still not get into the disribution. (This could be alleviated if > there was a "designated backup" for each package - someone who could > either temporarily fill, or accept a "volunteer ebuild", and move it > forward. This can happen. I've submitted ebuilds for backuppc-3.0.0, and so have many other people. In fact, the bug for it has several ebuilds that have been submitted but haven't made it into the official tree. I think that particular bug report might not be getting attention from the right people or something. That doesn't mean it isn't worth doing though, because people can still use the ebuild from the bug report. Ideally, a dev would see that, check it out for correctness, and add it to ~arch. Does anybody know how to call attention to a bug report that doesn't seem to have any devs paying attention to it? I think BackupPC is a fine product, and would like to see it in the tree for others to use. I'm using my own ebuild successfully, as are many of the fine folks who have contributed on that bug report. I'd just like my and others' efforts to be something that benefits more of the Gentoo community :) > 3. If a volunteer ebuild isn't proofread, it could contain a bug. (you > don't know me.) I don't think an ebuild would make it into the tree without being checked by a dev, and that's not what I am suggesting. I'm suggesting taking the burden of writing ebuilds off of the devs' shoulders so they can spend more of their time checking. Ebuilds for the majority of packages are pretty simple anyways, especially packages that just need a ./configure && make && make install, so getting a bad bug in the ebuild itself isn't going to be that hard to avoid. -- Randy Barlow http://electronsweatshop.com -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Florian Philipp wrote: > > Okay, here it goes: > > I think we could need a better support for binary packages. > There was a thread in here a few months ago about how to offer binary > packages for customers. As far as I remember the problem was (and still > is) that there is no easy way to check the packages for corruption > (trojans, stuff like that). > I know some things are only available as a binary but Gentoo is about compiling your own packages. Binaries are for Redhat, Mandrake and such. I moved away from that for good reason. > In my opinion the end result should be something like a build server > that builds and provides a set of packages with different USE- and > CFLAGS, possibly even accepting automatic requests from clients. > Everything could be digitally signed and distributed over a network. > > Other things to improve? A better documentation on USE-flags. In my > opinion every maintainer should provide as much information as possible > on what exactly a USE-flag changes. At the moment it's the > administrator's responsibility to find this out. Not really a good idea > on production systems if you ask me ... > I would love to see better documentation of the USE flag and what they do exactly. Some of them are so cryptic that even a google search is useless. Alsa is pretty straight forward but what is winpopup for Kopete exactly? Euse -i reports back, "Builds WinPopUp protocol handler" but what the heck is that exactly? I'm thinking a little more info would be really really neat. Make google something that is not needed maybe. > Maybe we could also improve our user-dev relations. I hardly if ever see > a dev or bug wrangler responding to threads in the user list even when > they concern Gentoo as a whole (like this one and its predecessors). > This is something that has been tried before. There just seems to be a few that doesn't think users and devs should be able to talk. Bad thing about -dev mailing list is that it only takes one to ruin it. > I know, all this should be redirected to bugzilla but since they are not > high priority problems and I can't - at least for now - help solving > them, I don't like to bother our had working devs and bug wranglers with > stuff like that. > > > - Florian Philipp > Bugzilla is not the place for this, yet anyway. I would usually say -project but there is very little activity on it so this is as good a place as any I guess. IMHO anyway. Dale :-) :-) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules]
Randy Barlow wrote: 7v5w7go9ub0o wrote: OTOH, the good news is that a newbie like me can install an outdated package (e.g. Vidalia); resolve dependencies; uninstall the portage version; download and compile the current version from the developer. If you know how to do those things, learning how to make the ebuild that does it isn't that much more to do. Then, instead of just filing the bug report, you can submit an ebuild as a suggested fix with it and help out. Linux works best when the users take part in it! Fair enough! My concerns with this, other than my abilities, are: 1. Showing proper respect to the guy who pioneered the effort to date, and who may simply be out of town. (This disrespect would be alleviated if there was an official policy encouraging "volunteer ebuilds".) 2. He won't be there to proofread my work anyway, so therefor my ebuild would still not get into the disribution. (This could be alleviated if there was a "designated backup" for each package - someone who could either temporarily fill, or accept a "volunteer ebuild", and move it forward. It would also be nice if there was a single, "temporary homeless" list of ebuilds belonging to folks who will be out of town for a while - this would be a "one-stop" page to notify designated backup people, and others who could keep an eye on the distributions.) 3. If a volunteer ebuild isn't proofread, it could contain a bug. (you don't know me.) P.S. A good place to start in writing an e-build for a new version of a package is to use the ebuild for the old version ;) I'll do that; and I'll also look forward to the reply to b.n.'s request. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Florian Philipp ha scritto: > Other things to improve? A better documentation on USE-flags. In my > opinion every maintainer should provide as much information as possible > on what exactly a USE-flag changes. At the moment it's the > administrator's responsibility to find this out. Not really a good idea > on production systems if you ask me ... +1 m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: Documentation about ebuilds (was: [Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules])
On Dec 14, 2007 6:15 PM, b.n. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Randy Barlow ha scritto: > > 7v5w7go9ub0o wrote: > >> OTOH, the good news is that a newbie like me can install an outdated > >> package (e.g. Vidalia); resolve dependencies; uninstall the portage > >> version; download and compile the current version from the developer. > > > > If you know how to do those things, learning how to make the ebuild that > > does it isn't that much more to do. Then, instead of just filing the > > bug report, you can submit an ebuild as a suggested fix with it and help > > out. Linux works best when the users take part in it! > > > > P.S. A good place to start in writing an e-build for a new version of a > > package is to use the ebuild for the old version ;) > > Can someone link a good tutorial for writing ebuilds? > > I know, there is the official Gentoo documentation, but last time I > checked, I found it pretty technical and, even if holy bible as a > reference, doesn't seem friendly for people who want to start hacking > ebuilds. > > m. > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > Here is one place: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml Here is another one: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ And yet another one: http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Create_an_Updated_Ebuild Use the one you like best. I personally like the second one.
Re: Documentation about ebuilds (was: [Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules])
Randy Barlow ha scritto: > 7v5w7go9ub0o wrote: >> OTOH, the good news is that a newbie like me can install an outdated >> package (e.g. Vidalia); resolve dependencies; uninstall the portage >> version; download and compile the current version from the developer. > > If you know how to do those things, learning how to make the ebuild that > does it isn't that much more to do. Then, instead of just filing the > bug report, you can submit an ebuild as a suggested fix with it and help > out. Linux works best when the users take part in it! > > P.S. A good place to start in writing an e-build for a new version of a > package is to use the ebuild for the old version ;) Can someone link a good tutorial for writing ebuilds? I know, there is the official Gentoo documentation, but last time I checked, I found it pretty technical and, even if holy bible as a reference, doesn't seem friendly for people who want to start hacking ebuilds. m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Grant ha scritto: >>> Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking >>> at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like >>> things being improved as quickly as possible. >> Where do you find it is slowed? > > I don't have statistics to support this, but it seems obvious to me > that things have slowed way down from the pace they used to be on. In > the beginning, it felt to me like the devs were building an extremely > powerful and flexible foundation upon which all kinds of amazing > things were going to be built. The foundation is still good but where > are the skyscrapers? I think you understood Gentoo wrong. Gentoo IS a foundation and, AFAIK, has never been meant to be something else. Gentoo provides an extremly flexible foundation to build the system exactly as you like. That's why it is different. Ubuntu,Fedora,Suse,Debian are *distros*: they provide a more or less ready-to-go system with certain quirks, attitudes, goodies and so on, on a silver plate. Gentoo instead provides a way to put up and maintain the system as you like. You want skyscrapers? Gentoo gives you what you need to build them, but needs not to care about them. What you want is probably a Gentoo-derived distro, not Gentoo itself. Have you considered looking at Sabayon? m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 13:58 -0600, Christopher Dale wrote: > > Feel free to post any ideas you have to enhance Gentoo's base > functionality to the list though, I think you've roused everyone's > curiosity Grant :D > > Christopher > > Okay, here it goes: I think we could need a better support for binary packages. There was a thread in here a few months ago about how to offer binary packages for customers. As far as I remember the problem was (and still is) that there is no easy way to check the packages for corruption (trojans, stuff like that). In my opinion the end result should be something like a build server that builds and provides a set of packages with different USE- and CFLAGS, possibly even accepting automatic requests from clients. Everything could be digitally signed and distributed over a network. Other things to improve? A better documentation on USE-flags. In my opinion every maintainer should provide as much information as possible on what exactly a USE-flag changes. At the moment it's the administrator's responsibility to find this out. Not really a good idea on production systems if you ask me ... Maybe we could also improve our user-dev relations. I hardly if ever see a dev or bug wrangler responding to threads in the user list even when they concern Gentoo as a whole (like this one and its predecessors). I know, all this should be redirected to bugzilla but since they are not high priority problems and I can't - at least for now - help solving them, I don't like to bother our had working devs and bug wranglers with stuff like that. - Florian Philipp signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Grant wrote: > Let me in on that. What can I do too? Find bugs on b.g.o. and help out! -- Randy Barlow http://electronsweatshop.com -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules]
7v5w7go9ub0o wrote: > OTOH, the good news is that a newbie like me can install an outdated > package (e.g. Vidalia); resolve dependencies; uninstall the portage > version; download and compile the current version from the developer. If you know how to do those things, learning how to make the ebuild that does it isn't that much more to do. Then, instead of just filing the bug report, you can submit an ebuild as a suggested fix with it and help out. Linux works best when the users take part in it! P.S. A good place to start in writing an e-build for a new version of a package is to use the ebuild for the old version ;) -- Randy Barlow http://electronsweatshop.com -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Grant wrote: Gentoo's foundation is great. I can't think of any major changes that should to happen to it. But Gentoo is at this point *only* a foundation. It needs more (removable) layers. FreeBSD created extra layers on its own foundation and called the result PC-BSD which is aimed at the make-it-easy crowd. PC-BSD is gaining momentum quickly and that will benefit FreeBSD greatly. I repeat, that will benefit FreeBSD greatly. That's exactly the kind of thing Gentoo should be doing. Removable layers for ease of use, removable layers for server deployment, removable layers for anything and everything. That's moving forward. In regards to BSD, it died the day Linux 2.4 was released. I deal with it on a daily basis as an admin and take great joy at plotting its total replacement with Linux, any Linux. It's good to see BSD getting off it's insular and inbred ass and doing something like PC-BSD. I'm sure it'll be successful in keeping the faithful from having to run Linux on their desktops, but I don't see it pulling many newer users in when you can run Ubuntu, Gentoo, or half a dozen other systems. However I'm extra grumpy today and the retarded legacy BSD4 servers are responsible. Maybe PC-BSD is more interesting than doing things Linux distros have been doing since they began. Is it? kashani -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[Fwd: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules]
Volunteer to pick up part of the load, I guess - something that I, as a newbie, am reluctant to do - but I guess I will if filezilla continues to languish. There is indeed an issue; e.g. TOR, a popular desktop package, is a release behind; Vidalia, is two releases behind - one a security release. Probably this is the consequence of a busy maintainer, but you'd think someone would pick up the slack (and yes, I've already filed a bugzilla security report on Vidalia). OTOH, the good news is that a newbie like me can install an outdated package (e.g. Vidalia); resolve dependencies; uninstall the portage version; download and compile the current version from the developer. --- Begin Message --- > > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > > treading water? > > > > - Grant > > I love gentoo and can't settle for anything else. What can I do to > make sure development doesn't stop? Let me in on that. What can I do too? - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list --- End Message ---
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Freitag, 14. Dezember 2007, Grant wrote: > > > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > > > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > > > things being improved as quickly as possible. > > > > Where do you find it is slowed? > > I don't have statistics to support this, but it seems obvious to me > that things have slowed way down from the pace they used to be on. In > the beginning, it felt to me like the devs were building an extremely > powerful and flexible foundation upon which all kinds of amazing > things were going to be built. The foundation is still good but where > are the skyscrapers? Also the Gentoo Weekly Newsletter not being > published in 2 months is an easy-to-analyze indication of slowage. > no, it is just any indication that nobody wants to wade trought thousands of messages and stupid forum posting. OF COURSE gentoo was 'fast' at the beginning. When there is nothing, everything added is a huge step forward. If you are using a ~arch system, you'll see douzends of new packages every single day. Is that slow? And FreeBSD: because of some needed kernel changes that are known for literally years but have not been made so far, FreeBSD on AMD64 has no nvidia support. So much about moving 'fast'. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Daniel da Veiga wrote: > On Dec 14, 2007 5:30 PM, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep treading water? >>> Is this a continuation? >>> http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 >>> >> Yeah, it's me again. >> >> > > I have a pretty small desktop system syncing weekly, and 2 others > syncing from it. Every week I see upgrades in many packages, from > system to desktop applications. I have 3 stable systems, with > different roles (a server, a workstation and one in "dumb terminal > with a web browser" mode), and they're completing 2 years of constant, > careful and flawless upgrades. > > You don't need statistics, or reports, or whatever. This list is the > living proof of Gentoo existence and the constant flow of information > regarding it. Another good point is that BGO (bugs.gentoo.org) is also > active, so, development is constant. > > I don't wanna sound rude, but this discussion is almost the same as > that one, as unproductive and "starving for attention" too (but with a > nice title), and this is the third edition. Don't get me wrong, but > what exactly is the point of starting this threads? If you're worried > about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, don't be, Gentoo is alive and > kicking. > > I would agree Daniel, There is always stuff rollin' in from all the gentoo lists... It's almost ridiculous how many discussions and threads are going on in there. In that respect, I completely agree that the Gentoo project is far from idle. For another snapshot of just how active gentoo is, check out the IRC channels (#gentoo) and as Daniel said, bugs.gentoo.org. "Don't get me wrong, but what exactly is the point of starting this threads? If you're worried about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, don't be, Gentoo is alive and kicking." - Daniel It's true :) Feel free to post any ideas you have to enhance Gentoo's base functionality to the list though, I think you've roused everyone's curiosity Grant :D Christopher -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > > treading water? > > > > - Grant > > I love gentoo and can't settle for anything else. What can I do to > make sure development doesn't stop? Let me in on that. What can I do too? - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Dec 14, 2007 5:30 PM, Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > > > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > > > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > > > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > > > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > > > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > > > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > > > treading water? > > > > Is this a continuation? > > http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 > > Yeah, it's me again. > I have a pretty small desktop system syncing weekly, and 2 others syncing from it. Every week I see upgrades in many packages, from system to desktop applications. I have 3 stable systems, with different roles (a server, a workstation and one in "dumb terminal with a web browser" mode), and they're completing 2 years of constant, careful and flawless upgrades. You don't need statistics, or reports, or whatever. This list is the living proof of Gentoo existence and the constant flow of information regarding it. Another good point is that BGO (bugs.gentoo.org) is also active, so, development is constant. I don't wanna sound rude, but this discussion is almost the same as that one, as unproductive and "starving for attention" too (but with a nice title), and this is the third edition. Don't get me wrong, but what exactly is the point of starting this threads? If you're worried about Gentoo slowing down or even dying, don't be, Gentoo is alive and kicking. -- Daniel da Veiga Filosofia de TI: Programadores de verdade consideram o conceito "o que você vê é o que você tem" tão ruim em editores de texto quanto em mulheres. Não, o programador de verdade quer um editor de texto do estilo "você pediu, você levou" - complicado, indecifrável, poderoso, impiedoso, perigoso. ��í¢ï¿½z� ��(��&j)b� b�
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 07:48:12 -0800 Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > treading water? > > - Grant I love gentoo and can't settle for anything else. What can I do to make sure development doesn't stop? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > > treading water? > > Is this a continuation? > http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 Yeah, it's me again. > Otherwise, I'm interested in what your definition of "forward" is. How about anything? More than nothing. > In that regard, I'm conservative: The core of Gentoo for me is to > provide an environment for me to get productive. My demands are > sometimes specific, thus Gentoo suits fine. Personally, I don't have > much interest in any major changes regarding Gentoo. Gentoo's foundation is great. I can't think of any major changes that should to happen to it. But Gentoo is at this point *only* a foundation. It needs more (removable) layers. FreeBSD created extra layers on its own foundation and called the result PC-BSD which is aimed at the make-it-easy crowd. PC-BSD is gaining momentum quickly and that will benefit FreeBSD greatly. I repeat, that will benefit FreeBSD greatly. That's exactly the kind of thing Gentoo should be doing. Removable layers for ease of use, removable layers for server deployment, removable layers for anything and everything. That's moving forward. - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Hi, On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 07:48:12 -0800 Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > things being improved as quickly as possible. FreeBSD is supposed to > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > treading water? Is this a continuation? http://groups.google.de/group/linux.gentoo.user/browse_thread/thread/cc31581cbfa4d0e2/a0b4a5d52f0bc112 Otherwise, I'm interested in what your definition of "forward" is. In that regard, I'm conservative: The core of Gentoo for me is to provide an environment for me to get productive. My demands are sometimes specific, thus Gentoo suits fine. Personally, I don't have much interest in any major changes regarding Gentoo. -hwh -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
> > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > > things being improved as quickly as possible. > > Where do you find it is slowed? I don't have statistics to support this, but it seems obvious to me that things have slowed way down from the pace they used to be on. In the beginning, it felt to me like the devs were building an extremely powerful and flexible foundation upon which all kinds of amazing things were going to be built. The foundation is still good but where are the skyscrapers? Also the Gentoo Weekly Newsletter not being published in 2 months is an easy-to-analyze indication of slowage. > > FreeBSD is supposed to > > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > > treading water? > > What do you mean, practically? That's a very good question. I think all kinds of great things "should" be built upon the Gentoo foundation. Although I doubt I'll ever use it, the graphical installer is a good example. Different layers going in different directions could be built on top of Gentoo's foundation. To me, it seems flexible enough to allow for anything. - Grant -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Grant ha scritto: > Lately I've been shopping around for other distros as well as looking > at *BSD. Gentoo development seems to have slowed way down and I like > things being improved as quickly as possible. Where do you find it is slowed? > FreeBSD is supposed to > be the closest relation, but even that won't do. I don't think there > is anything as satisfying as Gentoo out there. The concept is second > to none, the execution of that concept is fantastic, but it needs to > keep moving forward. What is the next step? Or should we keep > treading water? What do you mean, practically? m. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
