El mié, 11-09-2013 a las 11:41 +0200, Olav Vitters escribió:
[...]
> > * We maintain networkmanager and bluetooth support optional, and this
> > has been the case since 3.2 iirc even though upstream flat out refuses
> > to merge our perfectly fine patches
>
> Feel free to cc release-t...@gnome.or
[ Apologies for replying so late
I am not intending to startup the discussion regarding systemd ]
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 09:36:47AM +0200, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> For the record we did and still do support setups that upstream does not
> care about.
> * In the past, we had policykit/po
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:40:00PM +0100, Mike Auty wrote
> So there's lots of people that don't want systemd. Can't we group
> together and have some kind of an affect on upstream?
The answer is... probably not, given the "My way or the Highway"
attitude of the GNOME developers.
GNOME users
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 04:19:26PM -0700, Greg KH wrote
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 09:40:00PM +0100, Mike Auty wrote:
> > On 08/08/13 11:38, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > > i'm not volunteering but I never really got why our GNOME
> > > maintainers insisted on staying with it instead of going with the
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 3:51 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> I've been considering packaging systemd in sys-fs/udev with USE="systemd"
> and use of 'if' and 'else' plus creating virtual/systemd for proper /
> installation and some other minor, but bad design choices done in the
> systemd packaging
W
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 2:31 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El dom, 11-08-2013 a las 08:41 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
>> On 09/08/13 12:51, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>> > El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 11:26 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
>> > escribió:
>> >> Pacho Ramos schrieb:
>> If OpenBSD can do
On 11/08/13 10:31, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El dom, 11-08-2013 a las 08:41 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
On 09/08/13 12:51, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 11:26 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
escribió:
Pacho Ramos schrieb:
If OpenBSD can do it, then Gentoo can do it, too. So wo
El dom, 11-08-2013 a las 08:41 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 09/08/13 12:51, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 11:26 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
> > escribió:
> >> Pacho Ramos schrieb:
> If OpenBSD can do it, then Gentoo can do it, too. So would you accept
>
On 09/08/13 12:51, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 11:26 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
escribió:
Pacho Ramos schrieb:
If OpenBSD can do it, then Gentoo can do it, too. So would you accept ebuild
patches that make it possible to install Gnome 3.8 without systemd again?
Only mak
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 9:15 PM, Mike Auty wrote:
> Just because companies pour money into something does not mean they
> know what they're doing, or that they've done their market research
> into what their users want. I've tried several of the forks, and
> sadly Gnome, because of the backing it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/08/13 00:45, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> They thought deeply about the changes that are being made to the
> desktop, and they discussed it and reached a consensus about what
> the direction of the project is; you can usually read about in the
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 11 Aug 2013 00:10:29 +0100
Mike Auty wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/08/13 23:42, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> > On 09.08.2013 02:26, Mike Auty wrote:
> >> I could be a KDE developer, or a Gentoo documenter, or
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Mike Auty wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/08/13 23:42, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
>> On 09.08.2013 02:26, Mike Auty wrote:
>>> I could be a KDE developer, or a Gentoo documenter, or work on
>>> mplayer. All those people are open sour
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/08/13 23:42, Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> On 09.08.2013 02:26, Mike Auty wrote:
>> I could be a KDE developer, or a Gentoo documenter, or work on
>> mplayer. All those people are open source contributors and
>> necessary ones, but that doesn't mea
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09.08.2013 02:26, Mike Auty wrote:
> I could be a KDE developer, or a Gentoo documenter, or work on
> mplayer. All those people are open source contributors and
> necessary ones, but that doesn't mean that any of them necessarily
> has the skills
On 08/09/13 15:54, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 14:14:12
> "viv...@gmail.com" napisał(a):
>> On 08/09/13 13:38, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>> El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22
On 2013.08.07 13:45, Michael Weber wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Gnome Herd decided to target stablilization of 3.8 [1] which requires
> systemd.
>
[snip]
>
>Michael
>
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=478252
> --
> Michael Weber
> Gentoo Developer
> web: https://xmw.de/
> mailto: Mi
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 01:51:13PM +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 08/10/2013 01:42 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:04:09 +0800 Patrick Lauer
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Using llvm doesn't imply removing gcc ...
> >
> > Using syst
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>
>
> Support for it is given all over the place; like for instance in #gentoo
> and #gentoo-desktop on the FreeNode IRC network, on the Gentoo Forums,
> on the gentoo-user ML as well as for bugs on the Bugzilla bug tracker.
>
> The people sayin
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 18:55:03 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> Lots of users ran into troubles, and like in the current situation
> they were unable to get support as they ran an actively unsupported
> configuration.
Support for it is given all over the place; like for instance in #gentoo
and #gentoo
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:03:10 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 10:59 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:22:38 +0300
> > Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> >
> >> There was no decision to support Gentoo using any other layout than
> >> openrc (baselayout).
> >
> > Was there the decisi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 08/10/2013 01:42 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:04:09 +0800 Patrick Lauer
> wrote:
>
>> Using llvm doesn't imply removing gcc ...
>
> Using systemd doesn't imply removing openrc ...
>
Running systemd as PID=1 does imply not ru
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:04:09 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> Using llvm doesn't imply removing gcc ...
Using systemd doesn't imply removing openrc ...
--
With kind regards,
Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer
E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C16
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 14:12:42 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Rich Freeman
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Patrick Lauer
> > wrote:
> >> not must, but if I choose to run the official supported
> >> configuration, well, then telling me to go to an unsupp
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 18:50:49 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 07:37 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> > Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >> Somehow I get really confused by this selective perception (anyone
> >> remembering the KDE overlay getting paludised and t
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> not must, but if I choose to run the official supported configuration,
>> well, then telling me to go to an unsupported state is quite confusing
>> and sends the wrong signal.
>>
>
> Th
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> Lots of users ran into troubles, and like in the current situation they
> were unable to get support as they ran an actively unsupported
> configuration.
Since when was installing half the packages on your system a supported
configuration (w
On 08/09/2013 10:59 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:22:38 +0300
> Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>
>> There was no decision to support Gentoo using any other layout than
>> openrc (baselayout).
>
> Was there the decision to only support a single layout on Gentoo? Where?
>
You kids don't re
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> not must, but if I choose to run the official supported configuration,
> well, then telling me to go to an unsupported state is quite confusing
> and sends the wrong signal.
>
There is no one official supported configuration of Gentoo. Nobo
On 08/09/2013 11:12 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:50:24 +0300
> Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>
>> So users will have gnome working but not any other component? How can
>> this a good service for users?
>
> Just like we can't ensure that everything builds with LLVM doesn't mean
> we shou
On 08/09/2013 08:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>>
>
> Just install systemd. There really isn't any practical alternative.
> Gentoo with systemd is as Gentooish a configuration as Gentoo with
> Ope
On 08/09/2013 07:45 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:39:08 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>
>> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
>>> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>>
You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>>>
>>> The upgrade path is
On 08/09/2013 07:37 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> Somehow I get really confused by this selective perception (anyone
>> remembering the KDE overlay getting paludised and the fallout from
>> that?)
>
> That's a very selective perception t
On 10/08/13 07:03, Walter Dnes wrote:
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 08:27:23AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote
What makes this situation so difficult is that it's not a single
random package, but one of the bigger desktop environments that
has painted itself into a corner. (Plus an uncooperative upstream,
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 08:27:23AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote
> What makes this situation so difficult is that it's not a single
> random package, but one of the bigger desktop environments that
> has painted itself into a corner. (Plus an uncooperative upstream,
> so all the "blame" gets thrown a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 00:32:08 +0100
Mike Auty wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/08/13 21:32, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 03:11:55 +0800 Ben de Groot
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 9 August 2013 21:57, Michał
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/08/13 21:32, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 03:11:55 +0800 Ben de Groot
> wrote:
>
>> On 9 August 2013 21:57, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> This one is *so special* just because we have a few folks
>>> which really have nothing useful to d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/08/13 10:35, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Listening comes at a price; you can't listen to everyone at the
> same time, all you will hear is noise because all the voices clash.
> So, you've got to listen to a selective bit of users and satisfy
> them; a
On 09/08/13 19:17, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:14 AM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/09/13 13:38, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Laue
On Sat, 10 Aug 2013 03:11:55 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 9 August 2013 21:57, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 13:45:25
> > Tom Wijsman napisał(a):
> >
> >> Your upgrade path is no longer an upgrade; the other ones are, and
> >> as said before, running Gentoo has no implicati
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> It doesn't help to keep so aggressively pushing it.
Neither does so aggressively pushing against it.
Dnia 2013-08-10, o godz. 03:11:55
Ben de Groot napisał(a):
> On 9 August 2013 21:57, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 13:45:25
> > Tom Wijsman napisał(a):
> >
> >> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:39:08 +0800
> >> Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote
On 9 August 2013 21:57, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 13:45:25
> Tom Wijsman napisał(a):
>
>> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:39:08 +0800
>> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>
>> > On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>> > > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
>> > > Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> >
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 05:22:38PM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
> >>
> >
> > Just install systemd. There really isn't any practical alter
On 09/08/13 16:49, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 09/08/13 15:36, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
and
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
> wrote:
>> Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> You just removed the upgra
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 14:14:12
> "viv...@gmail.com" napisał(a):
>
>> On 08/09/13 13:38, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>> > El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
>> >> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>> >>> On Fri, 09
On 09/08/13 17:40, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 09/08/13 15:36, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
It is not a
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:14 AM, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 08/09/13 13:38, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>> El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
>>> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> You just rem
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 17:25:10 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> No, that is definitely not how stabilization works and I was told
> something different during my recruitment process.
>
> * _stable_ (as in... it works on different setups... this is already
> not true for gnome)
Current documentation and eb
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 10:57:49 -0400
"Walter Dnes" wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 11:16:37AM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote
>
>
> > Though, an init system standard might be the most promising
> > approach.
>
> Ahemmm http://xkcd.com/927/
Are there existing init system standards then? Isn't this th
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:40:28 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> At least we know what ssuominen thinks... some prople are trying to
> hijack the Gentoo project at the excuse of Gnome to switch into
> specific vendor solution, and be on its mercies from now on. This was
> the exact plan of whoever put all
On 08/09/2013 04:57 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
>>> I think there may be a misunderstanding here. He only said that if you
>>> want to run Gnome 3.8, then switch to systemd. Because the Gnome team
>>> will not support any other configuration.
>>>
>>> He did not s
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:50:24 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> So users will have gnome working but not any other component? How can
> this a good service for users?
Just like we can't ensure that everything builds with LLVM doesn't mean
we shouldn't support packages that only build with GCC, neither
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
wrote:
> Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
>>> I think there may be a misunderstanding here. He only said that if you
>>> want to run Gnome 3.8, then switch to systemd. Because the Gnome team
>>> will not support any other configuration.
>>>
>>> He
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:22:38 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> There was no decision to support Gentoo using any other layout than
> openrc (baselayout).
Was there the decision to only support a single layout on Gentoo? Where?
> There is *HUGE* difference between optional components and core
> compone
Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
>> I think there may be a misunderstanding here. He only said that if you
>> want to run Gnome 3.8, then switch to systemd. Because the Gnome team
>> will not support any other configuration.
>>
>> He did not say that everyone should install systemd, nor that you need
>> to su
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 11:16:37AM +0200, Tom Wijsman wrote
> Though, an init system standard might be the most promising approach.
Ahemmm http://xkcd.com/927/
--
Walter Dnes
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
On 9 August 2013 20:20, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
> wrote:
>> Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> You just removed the upgrade path
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
wrote:
> Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>>> Just install systemd. There real
Alon Bar-Lev schrieb:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>>>
>> Just install systemd. There really isn't any practical alternative.
>> Gentoo with systemd is as Gentooish a
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 09/08/13 15:36, hasufell wrote:
>>
>> On 08/09/2013 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
>
> It is not a regression i
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>>
>
> Just install systemd. There really isn't any practical alternative.
> Gentoo with systemd is as Gentooish a configuration as Gentoo wi
Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 13:45:25
Tom Wijsman napisał(a):
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:39:08 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>
> > On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> > > Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > >
> > >> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
Dnia 2013-08-09, o godz. 14:14:12
"viv...@gmail.com" napisał(a):
> On 08/09/13 13:38, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> >> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> >>> Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >>>
> >
On 09/08/13 15:36, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design
On 09/08/13 14:31, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 08/09/2013 06:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
and does not work with OpenRc; it is a de
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 14:36:05 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> > How does not supporting OpenRC matter for Gentoo?
>
> The question puzzles me. For one it is
> * an implementation of virtual/service-manager which is in @system
But systemd is an implementat
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 11:40:58AM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote
> It may be pertinent for this reason (a "smoother" upgrade path) and
> this reason alone, to stabilize gnome-3.6 first -- just to get into
> gnome3 (and get gnome-2 removed) without having to also deal with the
> systemd migration a
On 08/09/2013 12:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
>>> It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
>>> and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design choice.
>>
>> We are not ju
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>
Just install systemd. There really isn't any practical alternative.
Gentoo with systemd is as Gentooish a configuration as Gentoo with
OpenRC, or Gentoo with libav, or Gentoo with emacs.
>
> So
On 08/09/13 13:38, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
>> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>>> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
>>> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>>
You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>>> The upgrade path is to insta
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 12:37:26 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > Somehow I get really confused by this selective perception (anyone
> > remembering the KDE overlay getting paludised and the fallout from
> > that?)
>
> That's a very selecti
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:39:08 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> > Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >
> >> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
> >
> > The upgrade path is to install systemd or to implement openrc
> > s
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 19:39 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió:
> On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> > Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >
> >> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
> >
> > The upgrade path is to install systemd or to implement openrc s
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> Somehow I get really confused by this selective perception (anyone
> remembering the KDE overlay getting paludised and the fallout from
> that?)
That's a very selective perception there. If you mean the fully
documented kdebuild-1 EAPI, wh
On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>
>> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
>
> The upgrade path is to install systemd or to implement openrc support.
>
Invalid upgrade path.
"The upgrade path is to install Fedora" is
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> You just removed the upgrade path for users.
The upgrade path is to install systemd or to implement openrc support.
--
With kind regards,
Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer
E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key : 6D34
On 08/09/2013 06:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
>>> It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
>>> and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design choice.
>>
>> We are not ju
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 11:30:17 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
> > and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design choice.
>
> I could claim the "design choice" thing for anything as w
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 12:22 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
escribió:
[...]
> Ok so we have these options:
>
> 1. keep systemd as hard dependency (current)
> 2. IUSE="+systemd" or "openrc-force" with ewarn when set to unsupported state
> 3. #2 + systemd in package.use.force, can be unforced
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
>> It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
>> and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design choice.
>
> We are not just talking about random ebuild features here that h
Pacho Ramos schrieb:
> This makes me think what is the problem with people moving to systemd as
> udev provider (even running openrc) :/
You can't use eudev in that case.
> 2. About the other one: probably somebody adding systemd to
> package.provide *on purpose* will remember to know that he ne
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 11:26 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
escribió:
> Pacho Ramos schrieb:
> >> If OpenBSD can do it, then Gentoo can do it, too. So would you accept
> >> ebuild
> >> patches that make it possible to install Gnome 3.8 without systemd again?
> >> Only make it possible, not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 01:26:08 +0100
Mike Auty wrote:
> I would like to think that open source developers working on such a
> large and integral project might listen to their users.
Listening comes at a price; you can't listen to everyone at the same
On 08/09/2013 09:36 AM, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> It is not a regression if a new version of gnome mrequires systemd
> and does not work with OpenRc; it is a design choice.
I could claim the "design choice" thing for anything as well.
Actually blender upstream does that for the brokenness of
Pacho Ramos schrieb:
>> If OpenBSD can do it, then Gentoo can do it, too. So would you accept ebuild
>> patches that make it possible to install Gnome 3.8 without systemd again?
>> Only make it possible, not turn it into a configuration which the Gnome team
>> supports.
>
> We have discussed this
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 08:27:23 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> [snip]
> >> So would you stabilize a package that works with paludis, but not
> >> with portage? Ouch. It should probably not be in the tree in the
> >> first place, but I that's not what I have in mind here.
> >
> > This isn't a good exa
Le jeudi 08 août 2013 à 21:03 -0500, William Hubbs a écrit :
> The decision to depend on systemd for part of its functionality is with
> gnome upstream, not the gnome team of Gentoo.
>
> Pacho wrote a good summary of what is going on. I can see why OpenBSD
> would provide the missing functionality
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 08:29 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 09/08/13 03:25, Michael Weber wrote:
> > Citing from Pachos blog,
> >
> > "[...] we are now forcing people to *run* systemd to be able to properly
> > run Gnome 3.8, otherwise power management and multiseat support are
> > lost, [
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 02:25 +0200, Michael Weber escribió:
> Citing from Pachos blog,
>
> "[...] we are now forcing people to *run* systemd to be able to properly
> run Gnome 3.8, otherwise power management and multiseat support are
> lost, [...]" [1].
> Pacho, would you accept patches and USE
El vie, 09-08-2013 a las 02:26 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
escribió:
> Pacho Ramos schrieb:
> > - openBSD is simply supplying the "semibroken" Gnome stuff running with
> > their setup (without multiseat working, neither power management, gdm
> > service handling, and any new issues that cou
On 09/08/13 03:25, Michael Weber wrote:
Citing from Pachos blog,
"[...] we are now forcing people to *run* systemd to be able to properly
run Gnome 3.8, otherwise power management and multiseat support are
lost, [...]" [1].
Pacho, would you accept patches and USE flags to make gdm an optional
c
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>> On 08/08/2013 05:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> It's not a regression; actually, it's quite common to drop features
>> that can no longer be supported. I don't see us blocking stabilization
>> for other cases in the Portage tree where a featu
The decision to depend on systemd for part of its functionality is with
gnome upstream, not the gnome team of Gentoo.
Pacho wrote a good summary of what is going on. I can see why OpenBSD
would provide the missing functionality of systemd for gnome (systemd
does not, and will not, exist on the *BS
Pacho Ramos schrieb:
> - openBSD is simply supplying the "semibroken" Gnome stuff running with
> their setup (without multiseat working, neither power management, gdm
> service handling, and any new issues that could rise from logind not
> being running)
If OpenBSD can do it, then Gentoo can do it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/08/13 00:19, Greg KH wrote:
> Become upstream developers and create fixes to remove the
> dependancy either by working on openrc features to emulate the same
> things that systemd has that GNOME requires, or split things out of
> GNOME so that it
Citing from Pachos blog,
"[...] we are now forcing people to *run* systemd to be able to properly
run Gnome 3.8, otherwise power management and multiseat support are
lost, [...]" [1].
Pacho, would you accept patches and USE flags to make gdm an optional
component to gnome virtual? Power managemen
[snip]
>> On 08/08/2013 05:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> OpenRC is just one init system that Gentoo supports. Gentoo does
>>> not require the use of OpenRC any more than it requires the use of
>>> portage as the package manager.
>>
>> So would you stabilize a package that works with paludis, but
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 08/08/13 22:06, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Anyway, are you sure openRC is better than systemd for desktop
> systems (for deserving the effort to keep maintaining consolekit,
> that is currently orphan, cgroups stuff and any other things I am
> probably fo
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
