Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: allow -1 for ACCT_USER_ID and ACCT_GROUP_ID in ::gentoo

2021-11-29 Thread Alec Warner
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 2:25 AM Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > On Mon, 29 Nov 2021, Alec Warner wrote: > > > - If Gentoo adds an acct-user/foo user, and that user already exists > > on my system with the wrong UID: the eclass dies[0]. > > I don't think that's correct. The eclass will just use

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: allow -1 for ACCT_USER_ID and ACCT_GROUP_ID in ::gentoo

2021-11-29 Thread James Cloos
> "UM" == Ulrich Mueller writes: UM> Also, why would one allocate UIDs in the 500..999 range (1000 is fine, UM> actually)? Gentoo always had UID_MIN=1000 and SYS_UID_MAX=999. why do you thing gentoo is everyone's first or only dist on their network? or even on any given box? forcing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Don't use UIDs and GIDs below 100 without QA approval

2021-11-29 Thread Eray Aslan
On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 11:06:36AM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 09:36:32AM +0300, Eray Aslan wrote: > >> 1/ Static allocation does not really solve a problem. Not really not > >> nowadays > >> 2/ We cant keep adding new IDs to a distribution as new software gets > >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Python packages up for grabs

2021-11-29 Thread Michał Górny
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 14:44 +0100, Tobias Klausmann wrote: > Hi! > > I don't really use any of these anymore, so I'd love for someone else to > maintain them: > > dev-python/pockets > dev-python/pycodestyle > dev-python/pynacl > > Pockets has no revdeps, so ditching it entirely is also an

[gentoo-dev] Python packages up for grabs

2021-11-29 Thread Tobias Klausmann
Hi! I don't really use any of these anymore, so I'd love for someone else to maintain them: dev-python/pockets dev-python/pycodestyle dev-python/pynacl Pockets has no revdeps, so ditching it entirely is also an option. Pycodestyle is heavily intertwined with autopep8 and friends, so it might

Re: [gentoo-dev] Clang/LLVM profile

2021-11-29 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
> Honestly, I think this is pretty on-topic for gentoo-dev given a lot of us > are quite interested in this. ^ this > - I'm not sure why you would need virtual/toolchain or virtual/binutils > unless it's just for usage within bootstrapping scripts? Seems more like > you could just remove gcc from

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: allow -1 for ACCT_USER_ID and ACCT_GROUP_ID in ::gentoo

2021-11-29 Thread Michael Orlitzky
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 05:05 +, Sam James wrote: > > What I wish we had done (and there's still time to do, albeit belated -- > it's still useful for the remaining big bits like Apache and nginx) is > write a news item explaining the implications and linked to a page > like

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] kernel-2.eclass: Respect portage CC variable

2021-11-29 Thread Adrian Ratiu
Starting with kernel >= v5.7 the build system can override this variable by passing LLVM=1 [1], but for older kernels or in cases where the LLVM toolchain is setup directly via portage, CC should be respected to avoid situations like building the kernel with clang but the headers with gcc. [1]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: allow -1 for ACCT_USER_ID and ACCT_GROUP_ID in ::gentoo

2021-11-29 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2021, Alec Warner wrote: > - If Gentoo adds an acct-user/foo user, and that user already exists > on my system with the wrong UID: the eclass dies[0]. I don't think that's correct. The eclass will just use the already existing UID then (except for the very few acct-user