On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:33:20AM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-01-19 at 13:25 +0200, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
> > In this case, the expectation to compile manpages does not come free
> > of cost and protects noone. By the above formulation, the cost
> > "should" not come in the form
On Thu, 2023-01-19 at 13:25 +0200, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
>
> In this case, the expectation to compile manpages does not come free
> of cost and protects noone. By the above formulation, the cost
> "should" not come in the form of additional (heavy! dev-python/sphinx
> and deps are 75M)
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 01:25:19PM +0200, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
> I would like to continue https://bugs.gentoo.org/890589 here and also
> increase the audience. The original policy was voted upon by 6 seniors and
> approved with no documented opposition or discussion. I think it's possible
> that
On Wed, 2023-01-18 at 20:48 -0500, Joshua Kinard wrote:
>
> So is adding a default definition of TZ to our base system
> /etc/profile something we want to look at? I
> haven't tried any other methods of benchmarking to see if not making
> those additional syscalls is just placebo
> or if there
Michał Górny writes:
> On Wed, 2023-01-18 at 20:48 -0500, Joshua Kinard wrote:
>> So this article[1] from 2017 popped up again on the tech radar via
>> hackernews[2] and a few other sites[3]. It
>> annotates how if the envvar TZ is undefined on a Linux system, it causes
>> glibc to generate
I would like to continue https://bugs.gentoo.org/890589 here and also increase
the audience. The original policy was voted upon by 6 seniors and approved with
no documented opposition or discussion. I think it's possible that it went
under the radar a bit. It says:
> Packages must not disable
