Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout 2 stabilisation todo

2009-05-23 Thread Tobias Klausmann
Hi! On Fri, 22 May 2009, Dawid Węgliński wrote: > Haven't tested it yet on my box, but i'd like to know if openrc > handles 801.2Q support. Near as I can tell, it does (some lines shortened for brevity): [r...@sareth ~]# eix -Ic openrc [I] sys-apps/openrc (0.4.3...@05/15/2009): OpenRC manages t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout 2 stabilisation todo

2009-05-23 Thread Dawid Węgliński
On Saturday 23 of May 2009 10:53:49 Tobias Klausmann wrote: > Hi! > > On Fri, 22 May 2009, Dawid Węgliński wrote: > > Haven't tested it yet on my box, but i'd like to know if openrc > > handles 801.2Q support. > > Near as I can tell, it does (some lines shortened for brevity): > > [r...@sareth ~]#

Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout 2 stabilisation todo

2009-05-23 Thread Alin Năstac
Doug Goldstein wrote: > The only reason why OpenRC has not come up for stabilization by it's > maintainers is the fact that everytime there's a new version readied > for release, on the horizon there's new incompatible changes being > planned for the next version. The OpenRC maintainers in Gentoo h

[gentoo-dev] The VMware packages are in need of a maintainer

2009-05-23 Thread Mike Auty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Everybody, Last week I stepped down from the vmware herd, and since I was the only member left, there are no more maintainers for the vmware packages in the tree. The current packages are vmware-workstation, vmware-server, vmware-player, vmware-mo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout 2 stabilisation todo

2009-05-23 Thread Roy Marples
Alin Năstac wrote: > Doug Goldstein wrote: >> The only reason why OpenRC has not come up for stabilization by it's >> maintainers is the fact that everytime there's a new version readied >> for release, on the horizon there's new incompatible changes being >> planned for the next version. The OpenR

Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout 2 stabilisation todo

2009-05-23 Thread Roy Marples
Roy Marples wrote: > One side effect of this is that daemons such was wpa_supplicant and PPP > are now init scripts proper - this is good. The only downside is that > you lose the ability to control each interface via init.d. Instead I > propose you control this via ifconfig. Uh, so in summary any

Re: [gentoo-dev] Baselayout 2 stabilisation todo

2009-05-23 Thread Mike Auty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Roy Marples wrote: > Attached is the new conf.d/net sample. Sorry, I missed those. Did lists.g.o remove them, or were they not attached? > As such, a side project I've started is a new ifconfig tool > [1] to handle everything from vlans, to bridging

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Mounir Lamouri
William Hubbs wrote: > [snip] > My question for the group is, how do you feel about speech software > being on our minimal cd as well as our live cd? I agree, it should be in our minimal and live CD's. There is no reason to consider blind persons out of the minimal CD. Mounir

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Andrew Gaffney
On 05/23/2009 05:56 PM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: William Hubbs wrote: [snip] My question for the group is, how do you feel about speech software being on our minimal cd as well as our live cd? I agree, it should be in our minimal and live CD's. There is no reason to consider blind persons out of t

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Thomas Pani
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 1:14 AM, Andrew Gaffney wrote: > The real issue here is the size. If these additional packages plus all of > the alsa modules add 20MB to the minimal CD, it's just not worth it. It's > not "minimal" anymore. > Could you elaborate whom that change would affect (negatively)?

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Dale
Thomas Pani wrote: > On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 1:14 AM, Andrew Gaffney wrote: > >> The real issue here is the size. If these additional packages plus all of >> the alsa modules add 20MB to the minimal CD, it's just not worth it. It's >> not "minimal" anymore. >> >> > Could you elaborate whom

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Ferris McCormick
On Sat, 23 May 2009 18:14:57 -0500 Andrew Gaffney wrote: > On 05/23/2009 05:56 PM, Mounir Lamouri wrote: > > William Hubbs wrote: > >> [snip] > >> My question for the group is, how do you feel about speech software > >> being on our minimal cd as well as our live cd? > > I agree, it should be in

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Dale
Ferris McCormick wrote: > > If the 20MB is a real problem, I think the alternative is to have two > versions of the "minimal CD". Otherwise it seems to me that Gentoo is > discriminating against people who cannot see the screen, and I would > consider that to be very tacky at best. > > Someone (rd

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread William Hubbs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 07:32:18PM -0500, Dale wrote: > Thomas Pani wrote: > > On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 1:14 AM, Andrew Gaffney wrote: > > > >> The real issue here is the size. If these additional packages plus all of > >> the alsa modules add 20MB

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Ferris McCormick
On Sat, 23 May 2009 20:12:17 -0500 Dale wrote: > Ferris McCormick wrote: > > > > If the 20MB is a real problem, I think the alternative is to have two > > versions of the "minimal CD". Otherwise it seems to me that Gentoo is > > discriminating against people who cannot see the screen, and I woul

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread William Hubbs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 08:12:17PM -0500, Dale wrote: > Ferris McCormick wrote: > > > > If the 20MB is a real problem, I think the alternative is to have two > > versions of the "minimal CD". Otherwise it seems to me that Gentoo is > > discriminating

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Dale
William Hubbs wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 07:32:18PM -0500, Dale wrote: > >> > > For a person on dial-up, about 2 1/2 hours of additional download. That > > said, I'd be OK with the increase in size if it would help a person who > > can't see the screen. > > It is impossible for a person

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread Dale
William Hubbs wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 08:12:17PM -0500, Dale wrote: > > Ferris McCormick wrote: > >> If the 20MB is a real problem, I think the alternative is to have two > >> versions of the "minimal CD". Otherwise it seems to me that Gentoo is > >> discriminating against people who cann

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: Accessibility on our release media

2009-05-23 Thread William Hubbs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 09:47:24PM -0500, Dale wrote: > Maybe I am being misunderstood. I'm all for it even if it does make it > bigger. It's a good idea in my opinion. Hi Dale, no, I didn't misunderstand you, and I am sorry if I came across tha

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: dev-python/glewpy and dev-python/pycrash

2009-05-23 Thread Jesus Rivero
Hello everyone, dev-python/pycrash and dev-python/glewpy are either dead or unmaintained so im masking them for removal in 30 days. There are some non-fixable bugs regarding this packages. (see bug #198330 for glewpy and #221267 for pycrash) Best regards, Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek)