On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 11:27:56 +0100
Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:04:53 +0100
Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
This will NOT be voted upon the
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:04:53 +0100
Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
This will NOT be voted upon the next council meeting on thursday ;)
Ok, made a few minor corrections, mainly
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
I like it - well done Marius.
--
Daniel Black [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo Crypto/PPC/dev-embedded/Forensics/NetMon
pgpD3JojbdJir.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wednesday 07 December 2005 04:04, Marius Mauch wrote:
As stated in the GLEP, gpg is outside the scope of this. As for the
questions, per entry sigs would invert one of the main goals (size
reduction). And so far I haven't seen any sufficient answer to
questions I raised on -core and
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 16:15:49 +0100
Paul de Vrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 07 December 2005 04:04, Marius Mauch wrote:
As stated in the GLEP, gpg is outside the scope of this. As for the
questions, per entry sigs would invert one of the main goals (size
reduction). And so far I
Hi,
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
This will NOT be voted upon the next council meeting on thursday ;)
Marius
--
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let
Marius Mauch wrote:
Hi,
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
This will NOT be voted upon the next council meeting on thursday ;)
Marius
Really great that this has reached us, digest-* files are really
annoying from my pov.
You know, I'd actually support a rather more abrupt transition,
where we announce that on a particular date all digest files are going
to be removed, thereby breaking any version of portage older than
portage-x.y.z. Many people would probably miss such a deadline, but
assuming that we also
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:04:53 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
| http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
Any reason for SRCURI over SRC_URI?
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain)
Mail
On Tue, 2005-06-12 at 17:04 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
I see nothing about GPG in the GLEP.. Would those manifest files be
signed like the current ones? Would it be possible to have per-line
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 22:58:06 +
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:04:53 +0100 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
| http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
Any reason for SRCURI over SRC_URI?
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 06:39:10PM -0500, Olivier Crete wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-12 at 17:04 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
I see nothing about GPG in the GLEP.. Would those manifest files be
On Tue, 06 Dec 2005 18:39:10 -0500
Olivier Crete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-12 at 17:04 +0100, Marius Mauch wrote:
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
I see nothing about GPG in the GLEP.. Would those manifest
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 01:39:03PM -0600, Grant Goodyear wrote:
Marius Mauch wrote: [Tue Dec 06 2005, 10:04:53AM CST]
As promised here the GLEP for Manifest2 support:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0044.html
You know, I'd actually support a rather more abrupt transition,
where we
14 matches
Mail list logo
