Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Kevin F. Quinn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:19:56 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 08:51:42AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 07:59:23 +0100 > > Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, De

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 (Critical News Reporting) round five

2005-12-14 Thread Andrew Muraco
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Ok, new draft. Changes are as follows: ... * Added emerge --ask thingie Perhaps it would be a good idea to have an extra prompt during -av and a forced prompt (perhaps with a timeout) for just plain old emerge. And to make people that just don't care happy, a FEAT

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Critical news reporting) updates

2005-12-14 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:48:45 -0800 Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | I wish you'd reconsider, because I was looking forward to multiple | repository support. Well, if Portage ever gets multiple repository support, then news clients can be updated to handle it. The GLEP says that already. --

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Critical news reporting) updates

2005-12-14 Thread Zac Medico
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: | soon. The solution to that seems simple to me. Rather than have | 'package manager' do anything, just have it provide hooks that will | allow you to do your thing at the times you want. Exactly what I am doing. Hence why I'm not making Portage know any more than it reall

Re: [gentoo-dev] mod_rewrite .htaccess support on dev.g.o ? (was: jforman touches himself)

2005-12-14 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 20:37:06 + Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | speaking of which, am i retarded, or does mod rewrite not work in | .htaccess files on dev.g.o ? | | last time i tried, i got internal server errors which usually means | that the feature has been disabled It's turned

Re: [gentoo-dev] mod_rewrite .htaccess support on dev.g.o ? (was: jforman touches himself)

2005-12-14 Thread Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 21:37, Mike Frysinger wrote: > speaking of which, am i retarded, or does mod rewrite not work in > .htaccess files on dev.g.o ? I asked for that too, the feature is disabled by infra. klieber should be the one to ask for the reasons iirc. -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò

[gentoo-dev] mod_rewrite .htaccess support on dev.g.o ? (was: jforman touches himself)

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 05:27:39AM +0900, Chris White wrote: > On Thursday 15 December 2005 04:30, Simon Stelling wrote: > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/flame.html > > Moved it: > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/docs/flame.html speaking of which, am i retarded, or does mod rewrite not

Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE ANNOUNCEMENT bugs.gentoo.org

2005-12-14 Thread Chris White
On Thursday 15 December 2005 04:30, Simon Stelling wrote: > http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/flame.html Moved it: http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/docs/flame.html pgpuIK8UTgdbu.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE ANNOUNCEMENT bugs.gentoo.org

2005-12-14 Thread Simon Stelling
Jakub Moc wrote: :0: * ^From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null What a poor flame. Read through the flaming guide [1] twice, and try again. [1] It once was http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/flame.html, where has it gone? -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gento

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Michael Cummings
On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 02:37 +0900, Chris White wrote: > On Wednesday 14 December 2005 20:00, Michael Cummings wrote: > > er.. why not just do an advanced query for all bugs assigned / cc'ed to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] How that doesn't accomplish the same thing... > Because i'm talking about filteri

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Mark Loeser
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:37:54AM +0900, Chris White wrote: > > er.. why not just do an advanced query for all bugs assigned / cc'ed to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] How that doesn't accomplish the same thing... > > didnt know e-mail clients were integrated wi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 02:37 +0900, Chris White wrote: > On Wednesday 14 December 2005 20:00, Michael Cummings wrote: > > er.. why not just do an advanced query for all bugs assigned / cc'ed to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] How that doesn't accomplish the same thing... Because that does nothing for filter

Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE ANNOUNCEMENT bugs.gentoo.org

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 06:28:04PM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote: > 14.12.2005, 18:12:05, Georgi Georgiev wrote: > > > And for the network challenged, output in local time: > > And for the bandwidth/time-challenged, who do not wish to waste their time > reading useless emails: > > :0: > * ^From:[EMAIL

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:37:54AM +0900, Chris White wrote: > er.. why not just do an advanced query for all bugs assigned / cc'ed to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] How that doesn't accomplish the same thing... didnt know e-mail clients were integrated with bugzilla oh, they're not, so it's still hard to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Critical news reporting) updates

2005-12-14 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 21:09:02 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | What's a 'PORTDIR'? A PORTDIR is a well defined, widely used variable. | What's a 'metadata'? A metadata is a well defined, widely used directory in the tree. | Outside of portage, these are also magic name voodoo. Su

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Chris White
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 20:00, Michael Cummings wrote: er.. why not just do an advanced query for all bugs assigned / cc'ed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] How that doesn't accomplish the same thing... > Just a thought as i try to recall where i left that can of coffee, > ~mcummings Chris White p

Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE ANNOUNCEMENT bugs.gentoo.org

2005-12-14 Thread Jakub Moc
14.12.2005, 18:12:05, Georgi Georgiev wrote: > And for the network challenged, output in local time: And for the bandwidth/time-challenged, who do not wish to waste their time reading useless emails: :0: * ^From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: [gentoo-dev] UPGRADE ANNOUNCEMENT bugs.gentoo.org

2005-12-14 Thread Georgi Georgiev
maillog: 14/12/2005-11:14:11(-0500): Jeffrey Forman types > To all, > > Once again, it's time to attempt the bugzilla-2.20 upgrade on > bugs.gentoo.org. I've tested this at home, and spoken to the bugzilla > maintainers and it seems the issue I had earlier with the upgrade is > easily remedied. I'

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP XX: Fix the GLEP process

2005-12-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 06:16, Grant Goodyear wrote: > Jason Stubbs wrote: [Mon Dec 12 2005, 08:06:54PM CST] > > > The purpose of GLEPs is to coordinate several teams into providing an > > overall enhancement to Gentoo. However, the GLEP itself is written by > > a single person rather than a

[gentoo-dev] UPGRADE ANNOUNCEMENT bugs.gentoo.org

2005-12-14 Thread Jeffrey Forman
To all, Once again, it's time to attempt the bugzilla-2.20 upgrade on bugs.gentoo.org. I've tested this at home, and spoken to the bugzilla maintainers and it seems the issue I had earlier with the upgrade is easily remedied. I've spoken with a few dev's and plan to do the upgrade at Noon EST on F

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Thierry Carrez
Lance Albertson wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>this has come up before on those lists, i just dont remember the >>outcome :P > > Don't forget about jforman! The outcome was that Bugzilla Product (here, "Gentoo Security") could/should/would be added as a Bugzilla mail header so that proper fi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 10:27:19AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 00:25 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 05:59:17PM -0600, Jory A. Pratt wrote: > > > Only problem I see with this is binary packages. We can not control > > > upstream binaries as everyo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 00:25 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 05:59:17PM -0600, Jory A. Pratt wrote: > > Mark Loeser wrote: > > > Basically what I'm looking for here is an easy to understand explanation > > > of > > > what textrels are, why they are bad, and why they should ho

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Chris Gianelloni
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 00:25 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 05:59:17PM -0600, Jory A. Pratt wrote: > > Mark Loeser wrote: > > > Basically what I'm looking for here is an easy to understand explanation > > > of > > > what textrels are, why they are bad, and why they should ho

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 02:38:00PM +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > there's a few problems with trying to get configure to detect whether > the host assembler supports the --noexecstack option: > - it's very easy to get the detection wrong and i'd bet money that >anyone doing it for the first ti

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 03:27:54PM +0100, Harald van D??k wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:43:28PM +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:19:56AM +0100, Harald van D??k wrote: > > > would need rechecking of the assembly code on updates just as much as > > > patches which add

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Michael Cummings
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 13:55 +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > this really should have been sent to the security mailing list and > cc-ed the security team > > this has come up before on those lists, i just dont remember the > outcome :P See, this is my (*cough*lazy*cough*) ignorance shining bright a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 01:43:28PM +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:19:56AM +0100, Harald van D??k wrote: > > LDFLAGS? Assuming you meant ASFLAGS, this doesn't affect C files, > > correct > > > would need rechecking of the assembly code on updates just as much as > > patc

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Lance Albertson
Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 06:00:21AM -0500, Michael Cummings wrote: > >>Gee, wouldn't it be nice for us lazy folks if the word [Security] (in >>some common fashion) were included in the summary line of security >>related bugs? > > > this really should have been sent to the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 06:00:21AM -0500, Michael Cummings wrote: > Gee, wouldn't it be nice for us lazy folks if the word [Security] (in > some common fashion) were included in the summary line of security > related bugs? this really should have been sent to the security mailing list and cc-ed th

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 09:19:56AM +0100, Harald van D??k wrote: > LDFLAGS? Assuming you meant ASFLAGS, this doesn't affect C files, correct > would need rechecking of the assembly code on updates just as much as > patches which add .note.GNU-stack would, right? no you were supposed to send tha

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Critical news reporting) updates

2005-12-14 Thread Jason Stubbs
On Wednesday 14 December 2005 09:52, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 09:11:51 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > | newsdir="$(portageq envvar PORTDIR)/metadata/news" > | newsdir="$(portageq newsdir gentoo)" > | > | Both have one level of indirection. The first has two

[gentoo-dev] Gee, wouldn't it be nice (security bugs)...

2005-12-14 Thread Michael Cummings
Gee, wouldn't it be nice for us lazy folks if the word [Security] (in some common fashion) were included in the summary line of security related bugs? i should seriously hope this doesn't warrant a glep, more of a "anyone else think it'd be worth asking the security folks about" question. (reason b

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Henrik Brix Andersen
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 08:44:33AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > The seriousness of the textrel issue is different for Hardened Gentoo > and normal Gentoo. For Hardened Gentoo they cause real problems and > must to be fixed to avoid compromising the overall strategy. For > non-hardened Gentoo it

Re: [gentoo-dev] Textrels in packages policy

2005-12-14 Thread Harald van Dijk
On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 08:51:42AM +0100, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 07:59:23 +0100 > Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 03:50:16AM +, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > my gnu stack docs are actually complete: > > > http://hardened.gentoo.org/gn