Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: install linux-firmware with kernel sources (was Re: Lastrite: Firmware cleanup, part #1)

2013-02-15 Thread Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/12/2013 05:30 PM, Christopher Head wrote: > On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:51:15 + (UTC) > Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > >> Christopher Head posted on Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:38:14 -0800 as >> excerpted: >> >>> On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 20:43:02 +010

Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrite: Firmware cleanup, part #1

2013-02-15 Thread Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/14/2013 05:39 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 15/02/13 00:27, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: >> Remove firmware from users systems with no upgrade path and then ask >> users to file a bug? That's pretty awesome, how can those people file a > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Ben de Groot
On 15 February 2013 22:34, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > (But I would still argue that "spotting overlay usage" is not always as > simple; at least in one case I got somebody who was trying to hide their > use of proaudio.) Users editing the output of emerge --info and hiding they overlay usage is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/02/2013 10:44, Alec Warner wrote: > I empathize, but I'm not really sure it is a blocker for this effort. > Developers already have to evaluate whether the bug the user filed is > legitimate; I don't think this makes that significantly more > difficult. As stated. spotting overlay usage is pr

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Ben Kohler
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > > > I expect to see the full result one would have to emerge -epv > [package] , at least that will report the repos for all *DEPENDs > (although it is a bit overkill to have users submit that in the > general case) > > There are also comma

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/02/13 08:10 AM, Cyprien Nicolas wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:48:34PM +0100, Cyprien Nicolas wrote: >> Not really, this works when the bug is opened against a given >> package from an overlay. Diego's raised issue is about some >> *DEPEND

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Cyprien Nicolas
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:48:34PM +0100, Cyprien Nicolas wrote: > Not really, this works when the bug is opened against a given package > from an overlay. Diego's raised issue is about some *DEPEND installed > from an overlay, but the failing package is from the tree. > > emerge --info will not re

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/02/13 13:58, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > Freedom is overrated, especially by those who use such sound > bites. Whilst you do get to decide how and if you choose to value my freedom, you most certainly do *not* get to decide how I should rate it

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 15/02/2013 11:33, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > Yes. It's difficult to govern freedom. Freedom is overrated, especially by those who use such sound bites. Let me guess, you use CFLAGS="-O3 -funroll-loops"? I sure hope not. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Cyprien Nicolas
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 09:39:34AM +, Markos Chandras wrote: > On 15 February 2013 00:19, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > > The problem is when you have to triple-check that the user hasn't > > enabled some random fucked up overlay and you have to guess whether that > > might be the cause of the p

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k5 :-P Yeah, very useful. I went through most of the Python bugs and cleaned some up. It looks like there's a *lot* of maintainer-wanted bugs that are very old. I wonder if we can script clea

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2013/2/15 Gilles Dartiguelongue : > On another note, I just saw a report for EAPI per eclass which is super > nice but unfortunately, EAPI=5 is listed but actually unsupported by the > result of the scan :) > This can't be done better right now, as we use pkgcore to gather these stats and it is sti

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
Le jeudi 14 février 2013 à 19:19 +0100, Tomáš Chvátal a écrit : > Hi, > > I added the bug queries to http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/ based by year of > last > being touched. > > Take look, try to close the oldest ones/invalid ones and so on. > > I think it is lame we have bugs last touched in 2k

[gentoo-dev] Relaying a message from python software foundation

2013-02-15 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
In case you missed it and work in Europe with Python, http://pyfound.blogspot.fr/2013/02/python-trademark-at-risk-in-europe-we.html -- Gilles Dartiguelongue Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2013/2/15 Markos Chandras : > On 14 February 2013 19:26, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: >> Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a): >>> >>> Why not 2011 and 2012 as well? >> >> Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository. >> > > Ok I was just wondering if there was a reason you

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2013/2/15 Alec Warner : > > I was under the impression we just left those bugs open forever...are > we closing them now? > Why should we keep them opened forever. They should be closed when the package is no longer provided anywhere or obsoleted by something else.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Alec Warner
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > 2013/2/14 Agostino Sarubbo : >> Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff.. > > Oh but we need to see them, quite few of those can be closed as > invalid because the upstream is long ago dead. > > Tom > I was under the impression

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Alec Warner
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > On 15/02/2013 01:15, Rich Freeman wrote: >> How? We don't support overlays in the main tree. I could see a >> package maintainer being nice if pinged by an overlay maintainer and >> delaying some change for a short time to let an overl

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Markos Chandras
On 14 February 2013 19:26, Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > Dne Čt 14. února 2013 18:34:10, Markos Chandras napsal(a): >> >> Why not 2011 and 2012 as well? > > Feel free to add more, its on qa-scripts git repository. > Ok I was just wondering if there was a reason you did not add them along with the others

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last time touched bugs by year

2013-02-15 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
2013/2/14 Agostino Sarubbo : > Probably we don't need to see maintainer-wanted stuff.. Oh but we need to see them, quite few of those can be closed as invalid because the upstream is long ago dead. Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Markos Chandras
On 15 February 2013 00:19, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > On 15/02/2013 01:15, Rich Freeman wrote: >> How? We don't support overlays in the main tree. I could see a >> package maintainer being nice if pinged by an overlay maintainer and >> delaying some change for a short time to let an overlay be

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/02/13 01:19, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > The problem is when you have to triple-check that the user hasn't > enabled some random fucked up overlay and you have to guess whether > that might be the cause of the problem. Yes. It's difficult to g

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] RFC: Graveyard project

2013-02-15 Thread Florian Philipp
Am 15.02.2013 01:19, schrieb Diego Elio Pettenò: > On 15/02/2013 01:15, Rich Freeman wrote: >> How? We don't support overlays in the main tree. I could see a >> package maintainer being nice if pinged by an overlay maintainer and >> delaying some change for a short time to let an overlay be updat