On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 17:57:44 +0100
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > If someone has at some point contributed to Gentoo then why not let
> > them keep their user around, should they want to come back. Of
> > course this doesn't work retroactively, but I think it would be a
> > cool tip of the hat to
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 06:14:23PM -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>> > Just ask anyone who has had to get their company to sign the FSF
>> > copyright assignment paperwork, for just how hard t
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 06:14:23PM -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > Just ask anyone who has had to get their company to sign the FSF
> > copyright assignment paperwork, for just how hard that was, and how long
> > it took.
> It took my university, who
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> Just ask anyone who has had to get their company to sign the FSF
> copyright assignment paperwork, for just how hard that was, and how long
> it took.
It took my university, who had no rational reason to own any of my
work, six months to sign the
On 21 December 2012 22:50, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Markos,
>
>[...]
> Maybe you can understand that there is a disconnect between what
> people who have no experience from what you do and what you actually
> do? That was certainly the case for me, and maybe also for Doug. The
> documentation that I o
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:01:00AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 02:32:25AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> >> 1. Are you party to any *copyright assignment* (eg FSF copyright
> >> assignment)?
> >
> > You need to rephra
Markos,
Markos Chandras wrote:
> I totally disagree with the way Doug started this thread.
That's of course completely fair, but try to look beyond that, and
let's focus on how we can make things better for everyone.
> Calling us "brain dead" ?
Please read email even more carefully, especially
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012, Richard Yao wrote:
> Dear Everyone, sys-libs/glibc contains LICENSE="LGPL-2", but it
> would appear to be subject to roughly a dozen licenses, many of
> which are not in the tree?
> http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=LICENSES;h=80f7f1487947f57815b9fe076fadc
On 12/21/2012 03:22 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> Dear Everyone,
>
> sys-libs/glibc contains LICENSE="LGPL-2", but it would appear to be
> subject to roughly a dozen licenses, many of which are not in the tree?
>
> http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=LICENSES;h=80f7f1487947f57815b9fe076fad
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 08:17:59PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> For further messages in this thread, please keep:
> Reply-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, gentoo-...@lists.gentoo.org
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 08:08:45PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 02:32:25AM +, Rob
Dear Everyone,
sys-libs/glibc contains LICENSE="LGPL-2", but it would appear to be
subject to roughly a dozen licenses, many of which are not in the tree?
http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=LICENSES;h=80f7f1487947f57815b9fe076fadc8c7f94eeb8e;hb=HEAD
I can spot BSD-4, ISC and sun-rpc
For further messages in this thread, please keep:
Reply-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, gentoo-...@lists.gentoo.org
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 08:08:45PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 02:32:25AM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 01:16:25PM -0800, Greg KH w
On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:20:45 PM William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 06:36:05PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Friday, December 21, 2012 10:21:02 AM William Hubbs wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 04:04:31PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 09
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 06:36:05PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 10:21:02 AM William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 04:04:31PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:38:36 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:51 AM,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/12/12 01:05 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> Dale wrote:
>
>> J. Roeleveld wrote:
>>> However, it is, in my opinion, a workaround for a problem that
>>> has been forced upon me. As soon as eudev is stable enough, I
>>> will dump
>> udev.
[1] ht
Dale wrote:
>J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> However, it is, in my opinion, a workaround for a problem that has
>> been forced upon me. As soon as eudev is stable enough, I will dump
>udev.
>>> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/441004
>> Strange, I use a current-stable version of genkernel, /usr is on LVM
>and
J. Roeleveld wrote:
> However, it is, in my opinion, a workaround for a problem that has
> been forced upon me. As soon as eudev is stable enough, I will dump udev.
>> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/441004
> Strange, I use a current-stable version of genkernel, /usr is on LVM and the
> system boots c
On Friday, December 21, 2012 10:21:02 AM William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 04:04:31PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:38:36 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Ian Stakenvicius
wrote:
> > > > On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld
On 21/12/2012 17:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Leave the account but simply block access. One example implementation
> is to move the SSH key to another location, and have a lightweight
> method to move it back in place, with an absolute minimum of human
> interaction and required time. Done.
I love ho
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 04:04:31PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:38:36 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > > On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > >> An init* needs to be kept in sync with the rest of the sy
Markos Chandras wrote:
> > I'm really just trying to understand the sense in this.
> > --
> > Doug Goldstein
>
> Your tone is not appropriate for discussion.
Sorry Markos, I disagree with you. Doug makes it abundantly clear
that he wants to understand. I think we can all recognize that, in
partic
Stelian Ionescu wrote:
>On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 12:48 +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:42:23 PM Michał Górny wrote:
>> > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:31:28 +0100
>> >
>> > "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
>> > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:02:34 PM Michał Górny wrote:
>> > > > On
10.12.2012 11:05, Sergey Popov пишет:
> Some time ago, there was one bugreport[1] about obsolete mask entries in
> package.mask files in diffirent profiles. Bug is assigned to QA team,
> but only amd64 no-multilib profile was cleaned up, as i know.
>
> Maybe we should add arch teams, whose profile
On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 10:46 +, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 21 December 2012 08:49, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 21:30 -0800, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> >> I have several suggestions how we can improve things:
> >>
> >> 1. 3 months is too short period anyway.
> >>
> >> 2. Thi
On Fri, 2012-12-21 at 12:48 +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:42:23 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:31:28 +0100
> >
> > "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:02:34 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:24:45 +0100
J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 08:52:00 AM Dale wrote:
>> J. Roeleveld wrote:
>>> On Friday, December 21, 2012 08:51:09 AM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> An init* needs t
On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:38:36 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >> An init* needs to be kept in sync with the rest of the system as
> >> well.
> >
> > Just to be clear, by "init*" you mean {ini
Michael Mol posted on Fri, 21 Dec 2012 08:51:09 -0500 as excerpted:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Matt Turner
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>> My point is that you consistently write long essays that I, and
>> apparently most other
On Friday, December 21, 2012 08:52:00 AM Dale wrote:
> J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > On Friday, December 21, 2012 08:51:09 AM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA256
> >>
> >> On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> >>> An init* needs to be kept in sync with
J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 08:51:09 AM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>> On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>>> An init* needs to be kept in sync with the rest of the system as
>>> well.
>> Just to be clear, by "init*"
Michael Mol wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>> My point is that you consistently write long essays that I, and
>> apparently most others, don't bother to read. I'm not sure if you're
>> aware of
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
>
>> An init* needs to be kept in sync with the rest of the system as
>> well.
>
> Just to be clear, by "init*" you mean {initrd,initramfs} , correct?
Seems likely.
However, for the most part it
On Friday, December 21, 2012 08:51:09 AM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > An init* needs to be kept in sync with the rest of the system as
> > well.
>
> Just to be clear, by "init*" you mean {initrd,initr
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>
> My point is that you consistently write long essays that I, and
> apparently most others, don't bother to read. I'm not sure if you're
> aware of this.
>
> Someone sa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21/12/12 03:10 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> An init* needs to be kept in sync with the rest of the system as
> well.
Just to be clear, by "init*" you mean {initrd,initramfs} , correct?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linu
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
My point is that you consistently write long essays that I, and
apparently most others, don't bother to read. I'm not sure if you're
aware of this.
Someone said on IRC this morning in response to this thread
> the tragic th
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 7:32 AM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> On 21 December 2012 17:36, Ciaran McCreesh
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:21:57 +
>> Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> Your tone is not appropriate for discussion. If you don't like the
>>> existing policy, bring it to the list with a bett
On 21 December 2012 18:02, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> On 21 December 2012 17:36, Ciaran McCreesh
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:21:57 +
>> Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> Your tone is not appropriate for discussion. If you don't like the
>>> existing policy, bring it to the list with a better
>>>
On 21 December 2012 17:36, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:21:57 +
> Markos Chandras wrote:
>> Your tone is not appropriate for discussion. If you don't like the
>> existing policy, bring it to the list with a better
>> attitude so we can try and discuss it. But given that you
On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:21:57 +
Markos Chandras wrote:
> Your tone is not appropriate for discussion. If you don't like the
> existing policy, bring it to the list with a better
> attitude so we can try and discuss it. But given that you want to pick
> a fight with your email, I will most likel
On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:42:23 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:31:28 +0100
>
> "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:02:34 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:24:45 +0100
> > >
> > > "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > > > On Friday, December 21,
On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 12:31:28 +0100
"J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:02:34 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:24:45 +0100
> >
> > "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > > On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:57:25 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > Just let me know when you have
On Friday, December 21, 2012 12:02:34 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:24:45 +0100
>
> "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:57:25 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Just let me know when you have to maintain a lot of such systemd
> > > and upgrade, say, glibc. Then m
On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:24:45 +0100
"J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:57:25 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> > Just let me know when you have to maintain a lot of such systemd
> > and upgrade, say, glibc. Then maybe you'll understand.
>
> A shared /usr means I need to update ALL the
On 21 December 2012 08:49, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 21:30 -0800, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> On 12/20/12 7:21 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> > I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers
>> > that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low acti
On 21 December 2012 06:09, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Rich Freeman posted on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 22:33:55 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Doug Goldstein
>> wrote:
>>> I could MAYBE understand it if they're consuming some valuable resource
>>> that we need to fre
On Friday, December 21, 2012 09:57:25 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:10:22 +0100
>
> "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > On Thursday, December 20, 2012 09:31:36 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 00:27:26 +0100
> > >
> > > "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, Decembe
On 21 December 2012 03:21, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers
> that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low activity
> packages for herds that are stretched way too thin, and are still
> contributing to the distro in many ways
On Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:10:22 +0100
"J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> On Thursday, December 20, 2012 09:31:36 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 00:27:26 +0100
> >
> > "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 09:13:28 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 08:21:3
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 21:30 -0800, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 12/20/12 7:21 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers
> > that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low activity
> > packages for herds that are stretched way to
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 6:30 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
wrote:
> 3. I think what's important is to keep packages maintained. I consider
> maintainership to be a duty, not a privilege. If someone is listed in
> metadata.xml, but is not really maintaining the package, that creates a
> formal illusion t
El jue, 20-12-2012 a las 21:30 -0800, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." escribió:
> On 12/20/12 7:21 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers
> > that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low activity
> > packages for herds that are stretched
On Thursday, December 20, 2012 07:02:06 AM Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
> > No one has proposed moving everything to /usr. At the minimum, we would
> > still have /etc and /var in /, as well as various mountpoints. If we do
> > move those to /usr, then
El jue, 20-12-2012 a las 21:21 -0600, Doug Goldstein escribió:
> I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers
> that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low activity
> packages for herds that are stretched way too thin, and are still
> contributing to the distro
El jue, 20-12-2012 a las 21:21 -0600, Doug Goldstein escribió:
> I'm curious who had the brain dead idea to retire Gentoo developers
> that are still interested in the distro, that maintain low activity
> packages for herds that are stretched way too thin, and are still
> contributing to the distro
On Thursday, December 20, 2012 09:31:36 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 00:27:26 +0100
>
> "J. Roeleveld" wrote:
> > On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 09:13:28 AM Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 08:21:36AM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> > > > On Mon, December 17, 2012 22:31,
56 matches
Mail list logo
