On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:31 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
In a similar vein, would releng be open to moving stage1/2/3 package
sets to virtual packages or package sets?
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:13:45AM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
For stage1 and stage2 the *order* we build packages is relevant.
Is this really true? The stage1 is being built with ROOT, so it's
only using the seed stage3 packages. It's hard to have cyclic
dependencies when you're
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:31:16PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
May I suggest an alternative? We could implement sys-virtual/posix and
make it depend on all packages that are not necessary for @system, but
are necessary for proper POSIX compliance. Then we can tell users who
need/want an
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
In a similar vein, would releng be open to moving stage1/2/3 package
sets to virtual packages or package sets? Presently they are inside
catalyst, and I think this would clean things up a lot.
They're already in the Portage tree
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:31 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
In a similar vein, would releng be open to moving stage1/2/3 package
sets to virtual packages or package sets? Presently they are inside
catalyst, and I
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:45:37PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
Obviously this entails work on somebody's part, but would it still
make sense to make the stage build process more generic along the
lines Robin suggested? That is, instead of having 3 specific places
we use to generate a
Hey Jorge,
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
I know that our policies state that technical issues should be raised in
the dev ml, although they also support doing the discussion in specialized
mls, but they also mention that one should make an effort to contact those
involved in the
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Anthony G. Basile bluen...@gentoo.org wrote:
Although, I must say, Jorge's is being little premature here, and I
doubt the Council will act rashly.
So, while I was trying to be balanced in my reply, I'll admit it may
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
I know that our policies state that technical issues should be raised in the
dev ml, although they also support doing the discussion in specialized mls,
but they also mention that one should make an effort
On Tue, 30 Sep 2014 18:58:18 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:37:20 +0200
Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:05:19 + (UTC)
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014, Tom
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:37:20 +0200
Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:05:19 + (UTC)
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 13:22:45 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
No, there isn't a need for a Council vote here. This is something up to
Releng (in respect to what is in the stages) and to everyone in respect to
what is part of the system set.
I don't think many
On 09/29/14 07:14, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
No, there isn't a need for a Council vote here. This is something up to
Releng (in respect to what is in the stages) and to everyone in respect to
what is part of
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Anthony G. Basile bluen...@gentoo.org wrote:
Although, I must say, Jorge's is being little premature here, and I
doubt the Council will act rashly.
So, while I was trying to be balanced in my reply, I'll admit it may
have still been a bit too emotionally
On 11:24 Sat 27 Sep , Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 09/27/14 11:19, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:47:14 +0200
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
Because I'd expect a stage3 to be
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:05:19 + (UTC)
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto jmbsvice...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 13:22:45 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:47:14 +0200
Luca Barbato
On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 06:08:11 +0200
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
I've stopped following this mailing list regularly quite sometime
ago. To see this thread is still going on and no one bothered to cc
releng, to me shows a lack of respect
I expected
On 27/09/14 15:19, Luca Barbato wrote:
On 27/09/14 14:22, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:47:14 +0200
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
Because I'd expect a stage3 to be posix compliant
I agree. It's time to replace nano with Vim.
Surely certain stuff might enjoy having
On 09/27/2014 07:39 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 09/27/14 18:46, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
What is really needed here is a vote by the Council on whether to add bc
back to the stage3. If the people do insist, another vote
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:39:44 -0400
Anthony G. Basile bluen...@gentoo.org wrote:
And now for something completely different ... drum roll ... Really!
We have to have a council vote on whether bc goes into stage3? If
this does go to the council, then I want a pre-vote vote: should we
bounce
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 13:22:45 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:47:14 +0200
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
Because I'd expect a stage3 to be posix compliant
I agree. It's time to replace nano
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
I've stopped following this mailing list regularly quite sometime ago.
To see this thread is still going on and no one bothered to cc releng,
to me shows a lack of respect
I expected you to participate on the developer list to some degree,
since you are
On 17/09/14 14:09, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
Luca,
bc is not in the system set and is a dependency of the kernel or any
other package that
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 18:31:03 +0600
Vladimir Romanov bluebo...@gmail.com wrote:
Em. I don't agree. I prefer Emacs and don't like Vim. But if i must
choose between Vim and Nano, i prefer Nano
But vi is POSIX.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 27 September 2014 20:40, Ciaran McCreesh
ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 18:31:03 +0600
Vladimir Romanov bluebo...@gmail.com wrote:
Em. I don't agree. I prefer Emacs and don't like Vim. But if i must
choose between Vim and Nano, i prefer Nano
But vi is POSIX.
vi
Kent Fredric:
On 28 September 2014 00:22, Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com
wrote:
I agree. It's time to replace nano with Vim.
http://i.imgur.com/qRNTQGi.png
We need a moderated development mailing list.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 13:22:45 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 12:47:14 +0200
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
Because I'd expect a stage3 to be posix compliant
I agree. It's time to replace nano with Vim.
Vim is not fully POSIX
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
What is really needed here is a vote by the Council on whether to add bc
back to the stage3. If the people do insist, another vote regarding
adding or changing an editor to stage3 could be done as well.
The call for agenda
On 09/27/14 18:46, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
What is really needed here is a vote by the Council on whether to add bc
back to the stage3. If the people do insist, another vote regarding
adding or changing an editor to stage3 could
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 7:39 PM, Anthony G. Basile bluen...@gentoo.org wrote:
And now for something completely different ... drum roll ... Really! We
have to have a council vote on whether bc goes into stage3? If this does go
to the council, then I want a pre-vote vote: should we bounce the
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
I'm fine with including useful utilities in the stage3s, as long as
they don't go into the system set. We really need to
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
Luca,
bc is not in the system set and is a dependency of the kernel or any other
package that needs it, so why do we need to include a package that
Il 17/09/2014 14:09, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto ha scritto:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
Luca,
bc is not in the system set and is a dependency of the kernel or any
other
On 2014-09-17 14:20, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 17/09/2014 14:09, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto ha scritto:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
Luca,
bc is not in the system set
On 17/09/2014 14:49, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
On 2014-09-17 14:20, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 17/09/2014 14:09, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto ha scritto:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/09/2014 14:49, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
Agreed. I've been on -user for 10+ years and only a very few fetch their
kernels directly from upstream. The vast majority of users who have
described how they do it
On 17/09/14 16:29, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 17/09/2014 14:49, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
On 2014-09-17 14:20, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 17/09/2014 14:09, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto ha scritto:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be
On 09/17/14 10:13, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 17/09/14 16:29, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 17/09/2014 14:49, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
On 2014-09-17 14:20, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 17/09/2014 14:09, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto ha scritto:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Luca Barbato wrote:
The bc utility is
The bc utility is part of the posix tools and it might be used to build
linux among the other stuff.
lu
39 matches
Mail list logo
