On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:39:40 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 15 Oct 2015 19:01, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 11:34:22 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > - should the packages list be in a new packages.default, or
> > > should we create a new set to hold it, or should we just go
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:15:42 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Zac Medico
> wrote:
> > On 10/15/2015 02:51 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >
> >> The only change in moving it to @profile is the warning.
> >
> > What's the point of getting rid of the warning if the p
On 10/15/15 6:00 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
.
The last time I checked, @system was not used for stage1. Catalyst used
package.build instead. Has that changed?
Sorry, yes it is. I forgot how that file was interpreted. I was
thinking when I wrote my previous emails that it contained a list of
packag
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 10/15/2015 02:51 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>
>> The only change in moving it to @profile is the warning.
>
> What's the point of getting rid of the warning if the package is going
> to get pulled back in on the next @world update? Either w
On 10/15/2015 02:51 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/15/15 5:20 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 10/15/2015 02:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>> so if iputils is in @profile, and i do:
>> emerge -C iputils
>> i don't get the ugly warning about it being in @system, but if i do:
>> emerge @wo
On 10/15/15 5:20 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 10/15/2015 02:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
so if iputils is in @profile, and i do:
emerge -C iputils
i don't get the ugly warning about it being in @system, but if i do:
emerge @world
iputils comes back. i think that's OK actually since
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 10/15/2015 02:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>>> Given the goals, having catalyst seed /var/lib/portage/world seems
>>> pretty reasonable to me.
>>
>> Then the question becomes how. Does it
On 10/15/2015 02:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 15 Oct 2015 12:15, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 10/15/2015 08:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> background:
>>> everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people want the initial stage
>>> tarball that we release and you install Gentoo from to not be co
On 10/15/2015 02:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Given the goals, having catalyst seed /var/lib/portage/world seems
>> pretty reasonable to me.
>
> Then the question becomes how. Does it diff @profile between the two
> profiles and put the extra
On 15 Oct 2015 12:15, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 10/15/2015 08:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > background:
> > everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people want the initial stage
> > tarball that we release and you install Gentoo from to not be completely
> > sparse. we've got a bug for this to
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> Given the goals, having catalyst seed /var/lib/portage/world seems
> pretty reasonable to me.
Then the question becomes how. Does it diff @profile between the two
profiles and put the extra stuff in @selected? Or, does the profile
just contai
On 10/15/2015 01:45 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> What's probably desired is to create a stage3 profile which adds
>> whatever extra stuff you want to @system, and to use the stage3 profile
>> for to build stage3. After the stage3 is built, catalys
On 10/15/2015 01:29 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/15/15 4:14 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 10/15/2015 01:06 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>>> On 10/15/15 3:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
In portage, @world = @profile + @selected + @system, which means that
@profile is protected from depclea
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> What's probably desired is to create a stage3 profile which adds
> whatever extra stuff you want to @system, and to use the stage3 profile
> for to build stage3. After the stage3 is built, catalyst could set some
> other profile if we don't want
On 10/15/15 4:14 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 10/15/2015 01:06 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 10/15/15 3:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
In portage, @world = @profile + @selected + @system, which means that
@profile is protected from depclean since it's a part of @world.
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show
On 10/15/2015 01:06 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/15/15 3:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>> In portage, @world = @profile + @selected + @system, which means that
>> @profile is protected from depclean since it's a part of @world.
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=532224
>
> I t
On 10/15/2015 12:29 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 15/10/15 03:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 10/15/2015 08:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> background: everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people
>>> want the initial stage tarball that we release and you install
>>> Gentoo from to not be
On 10/15/15 3:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
In portage, @world = @profile + @selected + @system, which means that
@profile is protected from depclean since it's a part of @world.
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=532224
I thought so but wasn't sure and was about to test. Both @system an
For some reason I didn't receive the original email from Mike. I'll
answer via Rich's email. Hopefully I won't be misinterpreting anything.
On 10/15/15 1:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
items to sort out:
- should the list of packages be in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/10/15 03:15 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 10/15/2015 08:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> background: everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people
>> want the initial stage tarball that we release and you install
>> Gentoo from to not be compl
On 10/15/2015 08:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> background:
> everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people want the initial stage
> tarball that we release and you install Gentoo from to not be completely
> sparse. we've got a bug for this topic:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/393445
>
> items t
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Alexander Tsoy wrote:
>>
>> I was wrong. This patch was not merged upstream. It is still needed and
>> included in latest genpatches for 4.2:
>>
>> $ tar tf genpatches-4.2-6.base.tar.xz | grep XATTR
>> ./1500_
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> items to sort out:
> - should the list of packages be in catalyst or profile-stacked content
> -> imo it should be entirely in the profile
++
This would be really nice to combine with mix-ins so that instead of
special cases we could ju
On 15 Oct 2015 19:01, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 11:34:22 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > - should the packages list be in a new packages.default, or should we
> > create a new set to hold it, or should we just go with @profile ?
> > -> @profile has the advantage of already existin
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 11:34:22 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> background:
> everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people want the initial
> stage tarball that we release and you install Gentoo from to not be
> completely sparse. we've got a bug for this topic:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/393445
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 11:17:39AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> There are some very obscure cgroups related bugs in OpenRC which I have
> never been able to reproduce [1] [2] [3].
Disregard the second bug, it is a documentation issue possibly, but the
first and third bugs are the ones t
On 16/10/15 03:04, Michał Górny wrote:
>
>
> Dnia 15 października 2015 17:44:47 CEST, Michael Palimaka
> napisał(a):
>> This could happen if ninja is manually enabled (eg. make.conf) but not
>> installed
>> ---
>> eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 5 +
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff
All,
There are some very obscure cgroups related bugs in OpenRC which I have
never been able to reproduce [1] [2] [3].
There was a cgroup fix applied to OpenRC-0.18.3 which took care of
several other cgroups-related bugs. Since I am unable to reproduce the
bugs I have listed here and there has be
Dnia 15 października 2015 17:44:47 CEST, Michael Palimaka
napisał(a):
>This could happen if ninja is manually enabled (eg. make.conf) but not
>installed
>---
> eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 5 +
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass b/eclass/cmake-utils.ec
This could happen if ninja is manually enabled (eg. make.conf) but not installed
---
eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 5 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass b/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
index 480cd09..012b13f 100644
--- a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass
+++ b/eclass/c
background:
everyone wants @system to be slim, but most people want the initial stage
tarball that we release and you install Gentoo from to not be completely
sparse. we've got a bug for this topic:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/393445
items to sort out:
- should the list of packages be in catalyst or
Rich Freeman posted on Thu, 15 Oct 2015 08:36:59 -0400 as excerpted:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Alexander Tsoy
> wrote:
>>
>> I was wrong. This patch was not merged upstream. It is still needed and
>> included in latest genpatches for 4.2:
>>
>> $ tar tf genpatches-4.2-6.base.tar.xz | gre
i will drop iputils from @system:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/563148
but not until our releases are sorted out:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/393445
and i'll see if we can't get that sorted out sooner rather than later
-mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 15/10/15 06:57 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Mike Frysinger
> wrote:
>> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it
>> only installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to
>> require all
On 10/15/2015 03:26 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 10/14/2015 11:39 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
>> installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
>> all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long i
On 10/14/2015 11:39 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
> installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
> all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of
> releasing stage4's instead of stage3's ?
> -
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Alexander Tsoy wrote:
>
> I was wrong. This patch was not merged upstream. It is still needed and
> included in latest genpatches for 4.2:
>
> $ tar tf genpatches-4.2-6.base.tar.xz | grep XATTR
> ./1500_XATTR_USER_PREFIX.patch
I suspect what we all have in common
Alexander Tsoy posted on Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:09:29 +0300 as excerpted:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:56:28 +0800 Jason Zaman
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:57:45AM +0200, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > > anyone opposed to flipping
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:58:01 +0300
Alexander Tsoy wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:47:59 +0800
> Jason Zaman wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 07:38:43AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > > On 10/15/15 7:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Jason Zaman
> > > >
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:47:59 +0800
Jason Zaman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 07:38:43AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > On 10/15/15 7:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Jason Zaman
> > > wrote:
> > >> Can you try this:
> > >>
> > >> # getfattr -d -m- /bin/pi
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
>
> So it's not a BTRFS problem, but one of tmpfs. So I wondered if I
> maybe had missed to activate xattr suport for tmpfs, but no:
>
> # zgrep -i tmpfs /proc/config.gz
> CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y
> CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT=y
> CONFIG_TMPFS=y
> CONFIG
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 07:38:43AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 10/15/15 7:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Jason Zaman wrote:
> >> Can you try this:
> >>
> >> # getfattr -d -m- /bin/ping
> >> security.capability=0sAQAAAgAgAAA=
> >> # setfattr
On 10/15/15 7:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Jason Zaman wrote:
Can you try this:
# getfattr -d -m- /bin/ping
security.capability=0sAQAAAgAgAAA=
# setfattr -n user.test -v "foo" ./ping
# setfattr -n user.pax.flags -v "me" ./ping
# getfattr -d -m- /b
On 10/15/15 6:32 AM, Duncan wrote:
Tobias Klausmann posted on Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:57:45 +0200 as excerpted:
By now the messages are just an annoyance/spam to me, but I suspect this
may be more of a problem for people who have lower pain thresholds.
That could have been my post... all the way d
On 10/15/15 4:57 AM, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
anyone opposed to flipping this flag on by default ?
reference:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/506198
https://bugs.gentoo.org/556408
No objection, but a bit of a datapoint. I use btrfs on one of my
machines,
On 10/15/15 4:13 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:08:54 +0200
Tobias Klausmann wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
all syste
On 10/15/15 4:08 AM, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of
re
On 10/14/15 11:48 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
USE=xattr is needed nowadays to support:
- filesystem caps (those things that let you drop set*id and generally
improves system security w/little to no runtime overhead)
- PaX file markings (replaces binutils ELF markings)
- selinux
we actually have
On 10/14/15 11:39 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of
releasing stage4's instead of stage3's ?
-mike
i c
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Jason Zaman wrote:
>
> Can you try this:
>
> # getfattr -d -m- /bin/ping
> security.capability=0sAQAAAgAgAAA=
> # setfattr -n user.test -v "foo" ./ping
> # setfattr -n user.pax.flags -v "me" ./ping
> # getfattr -d -m- /bin/ping
> security.capability
Hi!
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Jason Zaman wrote:
> Can you try this:
>
> # getfattr -d -m- /bin/ping
> security.capability=0sAQAAAgAgAAA=
> # setfattr -n user.test -v "foo" ./ping
> # setfattr -n user.pax.flags -v "me" ./ping
> # getfattr -d -m- /bin/ping
> security.capability=0sAQAAA
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:56:28 +0800
Jason Zaman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:57:45AM +0200, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > anyone opposed to flipping this flag on by default ?
> > >
> > > reference:
> > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/5
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:39 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
> installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
> all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of
> releasing stage4's instead of sta
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:57:45AM +0200, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > anyone opposed to flipping this flag on by default ?
> >
> > reference:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/506198
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/556408
>
> No objection, but a bit of
Tobias Klausmann posted on Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:57:45 +0200 as excerpted:
> By now the messages are just an annoyance/spam to me, but I suspect this
> may be more of a problem for people who have lower pain thresholds.
That could have been my post... all the way down to and including the
annoyanc
Andrew Udvare wrote:
>> On 2015-10-14, at 23:39, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
>> installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
>> all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of
>> releasing s
Hi!
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> anyone opposed to flipping this flag on by default ?
>
> reference:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/506198
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/556408
No objection, but a bit of a datapoint. I use btrfs on one of my
machines, and that filesystem (apparently) does
Mike Frysinger posted on Wed, 14 Oct 2015 23:39:55 -0400 as excerpted:
> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
> installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require all
> systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of releasing
> stage4's
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 10:08:54 +0200
Tobias Klausmann wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
> > installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
> > all systems include it ? or should t
Hi!
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> iputils is currently in @system for everyone. by default, it only
> installs `ping`. do we feel strongly enough about this to require
> all systems include it ? or should this wait for the long idea of
> releasing stage4's instead of stage3's ?
60 matches
Mail list logo
