On 07-04-2006 11:07:28 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I mean, as a purely hypothetical example... Could you imagine just how
many dumb feature requests, questions and requests for code from the
unwashed masses someone would get if they admitted to having an early
alpha of an alternative to
On 19-03-2006 11:16:10 +0100, Grobian wrote:
I would really like to see a new GNUstep maintainer
[...]
Gentoo is now officially looking for people interested to maintain,
expand (*and FIX* :) ) GNUstep applications on Gentoo. We expect
interested persons to be willing to maintain GNUstep
Have a look at these:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/27451
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/30090
On 21-03-2006 14:19:31 +0100, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
Hi everyone,
I noticed 'logrotate' is becoming quite generic as a use flag:
--
Fabian Groffen
--
Unless somebody else wants to do it, I am about to step in here to keep
GNUstep in the tree. I already did some research on it, and it seems it
needs an update, and the previous maintainer masked a few of the CVS
ebuilds, so that eases things a bit. Seems many of the packages can use
an upgrade,
On 09-03-2006 12:30:33 -0500, Alec Warner wrote:
Regardless, I'd like to reach a conclusion about this, was GLEP 47
submitted to the council for the next meeting?
As far as I know: no. I didn't myself because I'm having a problem with
ppc-macos and the upcoming x86-macos (they will probably
At last... :)
Welcome Emanuele!
On 06-03-2006 20:41:28 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all.
Slightly late but never the less I'd like to introduce Emanuele
Giaquinta (exg) who joined the team a few weeks ago. Emanuele will be
working on Gentoo/OSX and ppc stuff when he's not making up
On 02-03-2006 20:19:19 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 21:10:02 +0100 Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| I'm also convinced that deliberate circumvention is easy to detect.
In that case, please provide a list of cases where !arch? flags are
being used to circumvent
On 13-02-2006 21:02:28 +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
On Monday 13 February 2006 20:29, Grobian wrote:
Maybe that has to change then? Like getting more bug wranglers that
also handle canned responses as a first-line helpdesk?
Wrangle bugs a few months and you'll see how hard it can
On 11-02-2006 20:05:58 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 08:28:34 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| kfreebsd-gnu is, in effect, one example you're using already. You'd
| have x86 as the arch, FreeBSD as the kernel and GNU as the userland.
|
| Yes, but you're actually
On 09-02-2006 23:50:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 22:48:32 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Instead of proposing a 4-tuple [3]_ keyword, a 2-tuple
keyword is chosen for archs that require them.
Provision should be made for future ports that require more than two
On 10-02-2006 00:38:47 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 19:26:11 -0500 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Assuming the CHOST variable is 'safe' is not a good thing, users can
over-ride this variable. Can you specify some behavior when it's set
to something bogus (
On 10-02-2006 11:00:33 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 09:00, Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo) wrote:
Could you add a definition of 'safe' to the GLEP? It's not clear what
this means at the moment.
Variables that can be counted on, as users can't change them in
On 10-02-2006 01:30:40 -0700, Duncan wrote:
Grobian posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on
Thu, 09 Feb 2006 22:48:32 +0100:
.. [3] For the purpose of readability, we will refer to 1, 2 and
4-tuples, even though tuple in itself suggest a field consisting of
two values
On 10-02-2006 20:22:06 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:25:47 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| On 09-02-2006 23:50:08 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 22:48:32 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| wrote:
| Instead of proposing a 4-tuple [3
Please find attached GLEP 47: Creating 'safe' environment variables.
The GLEP is a Gentoo/Alt initiative. Constructive comments are welcome.
--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo/Alt
GLEP: 47
Title: Creating 'safe' environment variables
Version: $Revision: 1.1 $
Last-Modified: $Date: 2006/02/09 21:42:57 $
On 27-01-2006 08:44:14 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 23 January 2006 23:04, Mike Frysinger wrote:
for those who dont know what i'm talking about, consider:
tail -1
head -1
some other stuff i cant remember
it would seem i lied about this (at least the first two still work)
On 25-01-2006 09:19:44 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Wednesday 25 January 2006 06:47, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Diego was mistaken here ... probably my fault because i lied to him at some
point on irc, who knows for sure ... at any rate, the sed ebuild does not
install 'gsed' on
On 25-01-2006 16:19:54 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday 25 January 2006 15:47, Stuart Herbert wrote:
The csh package currently has a maintainer who is an active Gentoo
developer; have you spoken to taviso first to find out whether he
wants to remove csh from the tree?
last we
You better bring this up on the gentoo-alt mailing list. Please
consider posting it there instead of going in a private discussion.
On 06-01-2006 08:15:42 -0700, Duncan wrote:
And I definitely wish you well in your G/FBSD efforts, but when I
mentioned them on my local ISP's unix (*ix) group,
On 05-01-2006 17:00:15 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote:
So - as GWN monkey - I'm offering my services as aggregator for project
updates. Maybe someone from the doc project wants to help to get this
information put on the website so that it's visible?
The following crossed my mind: what about a
On 05-01-2006 16:41:12 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jan 2006 17:28:13 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| I'm thinking of quite dull news, so absolutely not meant to be a
| publication like GWN, but just thingis like some commits on the
| portage sources that say to fix
On 02-01-2006 20:03:54 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 12:50 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
I guess I'm almost hinting at that Gentoo needs a single entity that's
sole purpose is to drive/research the direction and goals for Gentoo.
Or call it proper hierarchy. Management.
On 02-01-2006 21:12:03 +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote:
If it isn't one person, then you would need to find two persons or even
more that are completely aligned and have the same visions. Since
leaders usually are charismatic and controversial where necessary to
achieve their goals, it is hard
On 01-01-2006 21:35:34 +0100, Francesco Riosa wrote with possible deletions:
The information contained in the ChangeLogs is essential, and it must be
kept, but, force the users to download all that data it's not optimal.
That said I can see only two ways to reduce the ChangeLog files (a
On 26-12-2005 22:11:46 -0200, Marcelo Ges wrote:
Fellow Gentooers,
Here is a draft of an enhancement proposal that should allow upstream
information to be included in metadata.xml:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~vanquirius/glep-0099.txt
using http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0046.html
The
On 28-11-2005 18:54:14 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 19:46:57 +0100 Patrick Lauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 10:48:01 +0100 Henrik Brix Andersen
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| | A friend of
menus (Documentation, Resources and Community). The text
now looks vertically misaligned to me in the tabs-bar and footer, in
comparison how it was before the font size change.
I could live with it. Here are some screenies of the font-sizes:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~grobian/Afbeelding%204.png
http
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 24 November 2005 21:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
*shrug* I'm not sure that the existing docs team is the best way of
handling developer documentation.
If it's just matter of fixing the English in it, I don't think there's much
technical matter they
On 21-11-2005 19:15:58 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
| virtual/x11 isn't xorg for all profiles.
Perhaps the relevant people (macos?) could get in touch with me, and we
can figure out what needs to happen.
It may be that we'll need to add x11-base/apple-xfree into the || list
as well.
Stuart Herbert wrote:
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 18:22 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
It seems to be your own quest to have the news *only*
delivered by portage.
I thought I'd been very clear in the email that you've replied to that I
support making the news available via other ways. It's the
Jason Stubbs wrote:
To be honest, this is the part that I don't like the most. Integrating code
into portage to copy files here and there based on some predefined rules and
news readers reading and renaming files based on some predefined rules...
A filesystem based API just doesn't seem very
On 10-11-2005 20:55:37 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
Ok, you want a reaction, because you are Feeling Blue[1], right.
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 20:11 +0100, Grobian wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
That's your first misconception right there. Most users don't sign up
for things.
Doesn't
On 10-11-2005 21:33:48 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
We need to establish *one* authoritative source of news. We can't do
that if we simultaneously launch several sources of news all at once.
We have to launch *one* service first, give the userbase time to adjust
to that, and then start making
On 11-11-2005 10:38:43 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
No, the central repository certainly shouldn't be on the web (whatever
that means in the first place), it has to be somewhere in CVS
(easily accessible by all devs, though not necessarily in a direct way)
and should be replicated to as many
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:56:35PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people
| through existing intrastructure, which is cheap from an engineering
| perspective because everything is already there in place, and don't
| think of implementing
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 19:32:38 +0100 Grobian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| So, what list should the user that wants to receive those
| **important** messages sign up to?
That's your first misconception right there. Most users don't sign up
for things.
Doesn't matter
Daniel Ostrow wrote:
You are correct, there is no clear cut place for them to go...that's how
this thing got started in the first place. However why force users to
sign up for something which can't be appropriately filtered (installed
packages, keywords, use flags, profiles, etc.) when all of
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Which means you won't be able to satisfy your preemptive
| requirement.
Not at all. You can warn users repeatedly, but there comes a point when
trying to warn them any further becomes futile.
Then what is the point of this GLEP? Instead, just warn people through
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Motivation
==
There are currently several ways of getting news out to our users, none of them
particularly effective:
This assumes the following ways are really ineffective, something which
you don't prove or give any reason for. Hence it's eligable for
Jan Kundrát wrote:
On Saturday 05 of November 2005 11:28 Grobian wrote:
Remember that it is easy
to say here that users don't read what's on their consoles as well, as
in post emerge messages etc. So make sure you deal with it upfront, why
you think now it *will* work.
Emerge messages
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You must not have read the [#forums-whining]_ reference as that makes it
quite clear that existing methods isn't adequate. Even if you think the
apache maintainers made lots of mistakes you can't really fault us for
not trying to get the news of config changes out to all
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we were only aiming at a certain group of people there would be no
need to change anything. The apache announcements reached lots of users
but still left a large chunk of users in the dark. Moving the news to
-announce or some RSS feed wouldn't change anything as the
Bryan ��� wrote:
Even if you don't realise that this will be a big help for many users or
you just don't think those users deserver any help (not sure which one
it is tbh) - you might at least consider the fact that only having to
push news about major / critical
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Apart from that this point seems to repeat much of the previous one,
| it introduces a new unfounded claim (users do read, but now too late)
Read the linked forums thread and all will become clear.
the forums thread advocates against the new unfounded claim, IMHO.
|
Danny van Dyk wrote:
IMHO a text based file has a big advantage in this proposed application
over fileformats which use XML: Any administrator can read it with his
editor of choice, right from the console.
This is an important aspect for sure, but why can't such file be
generated from a
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
One reason is that there still is no real agreement on what schema to support.
Also when I wrote those I was more at home with DTD's than with WXS or
Relaxng, and xmllint (part of libxml2) did not support WXS validation.
I'll look into creating a WXS version.
Is WXS
Paul de Vrieze wrote:
AFAIK CDATA will be satisfied by one single space as well...
One of the drawbacks of DTD's. In general schema's are better in
specifying an xml format, as they allow restrictions on CDATA, and more
freedom in other areas (like true order independence).
Is there a
Ricardo Loureiro wrote:
Usable in the way that the client machines should be able to use
portage, except it's the hacked (or new package) version that should
do everything from the SQL server. For example, a emerge package
would behave in 2 possible ways;1- calculate it's dependencies from
the
Maurice van der Pot wrote:
On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 09:28:47PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Bah! No I'm not, because Sven pointed out that it collides with the
bugzilla resolution. So I'm going with CHECKED instead.
Whoah! Isn't REVIEWED the perfect keyword?
or APPROVED?
--
Fabian
Extracted from what Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
That's not a valid argument - you can use a bash function for calling
echangelog and repoman as shown numerous times on this list.
See my first answer (bash function).
See my first answer (bash function).
From a database point of view,
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
By the way, I am working to get catalyst running on OSX, so version 2.0
will definite suit your needs when it is released.
If you need help on OSX specific things, be sure to contact us...
--
Fabian Groffen
eBuild Porting
Gentoo for Mac OS X
--
51 matches
Mail list logo
