On 01/16/15 23:26, hasufell wrote:
Patrick Lauer (patrick):
patrick 15/01/16 04:16:55
Modified: ChangeLog
Added:libuv-1.2.1.ebuild
Log:
Bump
I expect people to ask me for review if they bump any of my packages.
That includes QA team members
On 01/07/15 06:24, William Hubbs wrote:
All,
Many packages have been masked in the tree for months - years with no
signs of fixes.
I am particularly concerned about packages with known security
vulnerabilities staying in the main tree masked. If people want to keep
using those packages,
On 11/19/14 10:17, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote:
Hey devs,
This is my first mail to this list. If this is out of line, let me know.
I've been playing around with Jenkins (continuous integration server)
recently for a couple of personal projects, including my own overlay. I
thought it would be
On 11/08/2014 03:08 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with everything
turned off does more than Portage with everything turned on. If all
you're looking for is the wrong answer as fast as possible, there are
On 11/08/2014 10:48 PM, hasufell wrote:
On 11/08/2014 02:24 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 11/08/2014 03:08 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 11/07/2014 07:54 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
Well, you're not comparing like with like. Paludis with everything
turned off does more than Portage with everything
On 11/09/2014 08:04 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 11/09/2014 12:33 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
It's not about NIH, it's about slow code being slow.
Can't disagree more. It's about wrong results, broken systems,
unreadable error messages, days of figuring out ruby, perl, haskell,
multilib, python
On Tuesday 14 October 2014 16:02:20 Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 07:52:03AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 10/14/14 05:22, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
For compatibility and migration support, we've kept the old OpenLDAP
2.3.x ebuilds in the tree for nearly 5 years
On 10/14/14 05:22, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
For compatibility and migration support, we've kept the old OpenLDAP
2.3.x ebuilds in the tree for nearly 5 years.
And you better keep them for a while, because some of us are stuck with
2.3, and mixed operation (e.g. master 2.4, slaves 2.3) is not
On Monday 22 September 2014 00:52:14 hasufell wrote:
| • repoman must be run from all related ebuild directories (or
|
| related category directories or top-level directory) on the tip of
| the local master branch (as in: right before you push and also
| after resolving
On Sunday 14 September 2014 15:40:06 Davide Pesavento wrote:
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
We have main developer repo where developers work commit and are
relatively happy. For every push into developer repo, automated magic
thingie merges stuff
On Sunday 14 September 2014 15:42:15 hasufell wrote:
Patrick Lauer:
Are we going to disallow merge commits and ask devs to rebase local
changes in order to keep the history clean?
Is that going to be sane with our commit frequency?
You have to merge or rebase anyway in case of a push
On Monday 15 September 2014 11:27:34 Kent Fredric wrote:
On 15 September 2014 11:21, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
iow, git doesn't allow people to work on more than one item at a time?
That'd mean I need half a dozen checkouts just to emulate cvs, which
somehow
doesn't make
That means either say you cannot expect anything, because there might
or might not be metadata or say you can expect metadata for any
provided/installed package in which case package.provided feature has
to be removed from portage.
Provided means not managed by the package manager
On Saturday 06 September 2014 16:22:46 hasufell wrote:
Anthony G. Basile:
On 09/06/14 12:12, hasufell wrote:
Anthony G. Basile:
And when you do ask, is a package that's provided installed, and if
so, what's its metadata?
When the package is installed, that data should have been
On Friday 05 September 2014 12:34:11 William Hubbs wrote:
All,
there is a bug open requesting that we add sys-apps/iproute2 to the
system set [1]. Originally the request was to drop net-tools, but it has
become just adding iproute2.
I wouldn't mind either option - net-tools has been
On Sunday 31 August 2014 11:39:22 hasufell wrote:
Martin Vaeth:
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/30/2014 02:35 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
For net-im/skype,
Screw skype.
Please don't. Not all communication partners are linux users.
Tox is multiplatform.
We have tox [1]
On Sunday 31 August 2014 17:13:49 Samuli Suominen wrote:
Trying to raise awareness:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/commit/?id=be2ea723b1d023b3d385d
3b791ee4607cbfb20ca
What are the effects for end-users?
Will things just quietly fail hard (e.g. radeon driver - no firmware -
On Wednesday 23 July 2014 01:06:15 Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:10:20 +0300
Samuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 22/07/14 04:05, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote:
And just for fun, since no one has mentioned it yet, dynamic deps
don't work at all on binpkgs since the
On 06/29/14 17:33, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 06/29/2014 10:23 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On Sunday 29 June 2014 17:03:52 Patrick Lauer wrote:
On Sunday 29 June 2014 10:12:22 Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 09:09:36 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's been a long time
On 06/30/14 22:15, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:25:27 -0400
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Agree 100%. I'm taking about masking things that HAVEN'T BEEN TESTED
AT ALL. The maintainer knows that they compile, and that is it.
Developers who HAVEN'T [...] TESTED AT
On Sunday 29 June 2014 10:12:22 Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 09:09:36 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's been a long time. To be honest I don't remember masking docker
but I most likely did it because I was asked to mask =lxc-1.0.0 by
the virtualization team
On Sunday 29 June 2014 17:03:52 Patrick Lauer wrote:
On Sunday 29 June 2014 10:12:22 Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 09:09:36 +0100
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
It's been a long time. To be honest I don't remember masking docker
but I most likely did it because I
On 06/17/2014 04:24 AM, hasufell wrote:
What about those of us who have been using crossdev to generate
cross-compilers for years w/o issue, because we run non-multilib?
Hardmasking crossdev to solve multilib problems doesn't accomplish anything,
other than just irk us. Why not hardmask the
On Saturday 14 June 2014 11:50:29 Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
On Sat, 2014-06-14 at 16:13 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jun 2014 16:41:51 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
However, this means that we force much more rebuilds than necessary.
This shouldn't be
On 06/10/2014 11:45 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
[lots of whining removed ;) ]
I don't know why CVS is still used for Gentoo main repository,
probably some infrastructure elements depends deeply on its
internals, because I see of no other reason why Git is still not
used despite efforts
On 06/11/2014 01:39 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
On Sat, 7 Jun 2014 23:08:15 +0200 Jeroen Roovers wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jun 2014 15:35:04 -0500
Daniel Campbell cont...@sporkbox.us wrote:
[2]: Overview of bugs that involve OpenRC, most for the package
itself.
On 06/10/2014 03:52 AM, Thomas Kahle wrote:
On 08/06/14 18:06, hasufell wrote:
I am not sure if that is a joke. You can pretty much ask most major
gentoo projects. The ones where I was involved more deeply definitely
suffer from that problem, including sunrise and games team. Science team
On 06/11/2014 12:10 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
But, for the most part we just need to get the back-end re-written to
work with a git repo. Actually migrating the tree itself to git is
largely a solved problem.
Weren't we also waiting for some gpg signing stuff to land?
That's completely
On 06/03/2014 07:25 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 03/06/14 14:40, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Would have been nice to fix all the dependencies BEFORE marking the
systemd- depending sys-power/upower-pm-utils stable. -- Joost
No clue what you mean, sys-power/upower-pm-utils doesn't depend on
On 06/04/2014 08:24 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:55:50 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 06/03/2014 07:25 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
On 03/06/14 14:40, J. Roeleveld wrote:
Would have been nice to fix all the dependencies BEFORE marking the
systemd
On Monday 02 June 2014 14:50:56 Parker Schmitt wrote:
I think we need to keep the opencl stuff. In a few weeks I'll have time to
help.
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 2:10 AM, Kacper Kowalik xarthis...@gentoo.org
wrote:
Hi All!
There's a bunch packages that I'm officially maintaining but due
On 04/14/2014 04:42 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote:
So one of the side-discussions happening after Heartbleed was the fact that
OpenSSL has its own memory allocator code that effectively mitigates any C
library-provided exploit mitigations (as discussed on the openbsd-misc ML at
[1] and Ted
On 04/03/2014 12:52 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
The 30 days maintainer time out stabilization policy isn't working
when package has multiple SLOTs, because
the bugs are filed for only latest SLOT, where as some packages require
stabilization in sync at both SLOTs
Question: Why is the
On 04/01/2014 01:13 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
On 1 April 2014 06:16, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Hello, all.
The late multilib ppc issues made me re-check our stable masks on
abi_x86_* flags and, honestly, I'm not sure if we're doing things
the right way.
That said, I have an
On 04/01/2014 10:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev
tetrom...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Tue, 2014-04-01 at 13:13 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote:
In my opinion your multilib approach introduces an unnecessary degree
of complexity, which --as has been shown
On 03/13/2014 12:52 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
No, I don't think gentoo-functions should take over the symbolic
link in /etc/init.d/functions.sh; that needs to stay with OpenRc.
My plan there is to work that into a script that prints a warning
message. It will stay that way until openrc-1.0.
Ahoi,
I've been looking for a clean git-converted gentoo-x86 repo for ... well
... mostly data mining as cvs / anoncvs.g.o is too slow for some things.
This has been needlessly challenging, which confuses me a bit.
First, a little complaint:
There used to be some data at
As previously discussed I would like to suggest that the number of
tolerated EAPIs be reduced. There's been some discussion
over the last 2+ years, with a weak consensus towards deprecating
some EAPIs. What, when and how still isn't decided.
So let's add some data so we have a better idea:
EAPI
On 02/10/2014 09:34 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
Adding EAPI 1 and 2 ebuilds is forbidden. (repoman-fatal)
Does adding in this case include revbumps?
By the design of our repo structure and repoman, yes.
(I don't see
On 02/10/2014 09:23 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
The statement Deprecating an EAPI can mean breakage depends on what we
mean by deprecating. I'm assuming here we mean something like repoman
won't allow commits at EAPI=1,2,3 but that ebuilds in the tree at those
EAPI's will continue working.
On 01/22/2014 03:00 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
I don't want to appear rude, but when reading this entire mail all I see
is someone who has probably never had to do it for real.
People are not machines. Volunteers really do not like having their
freely given time nullified and access removed
On 01/20/2014 10:09 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
On 01/20/14 15:59, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote:
#gentoo-qa | @hwoarang: pretty sure diego had the powerzz to suspend
people
Whether this has actually happened is something that
On 01/18/2014 01:23 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
On 18 January 2014 18:02, Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org
mailto:robb...@gentoo.org wrote:
- More people need to use the infra-status page to learn about the state
of Gentoo services.
A service middle layer like fastly or
On 01/13/2014 10:58 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 10:31:56 +0100
Fabio Erculiani lx...@gentoo.org wrote:
Portage can still take *minutes* to calculate the merge queue of a
pkg with all its deps satisfied.
Half a minute if you disable backtracking which you don't need. :)
Or
On 01/10/2014 08:30 PM, Igor wrote:
Hello Heroxbd,
Friday, January 10, 2014, 4:16:47 AM, you wrote:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
How about profile the
On 01/11/2014 02:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:31:21 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com writes:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the
failure rate is about
On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
Igor lanthrus...@gmail.com writes:
The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
How about profile the portage and
The discussion is based on some questions that are hard to agree on:
1. How much of a problem is an unused USE flag in metadata.xml?
Cosmetic issue. No functional impact.
2. Should such repoman warnings be fixed? By whom? When? How?
Yes. You see it, you fix it.
Not fixing cosmetic
On 12/26/2013 02:29 PM, hasufell wrote:
On 12/26/2013 02:27 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 14:25:04 +0100
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
That is funny that you mention cleaning up. I remember last time
when you broke 8 ebuilds at once because you just trusted your
You are interfering with my workflow and I already told you why I kept
the useflag, so stop reverting my commits after I told you the reasons
in a private mail.
Eh, it's been two days, and the temporary issue is still there ...
Fix your workflow not to rely on repoman warnings being
. (besides that you already managed to break the
Manifest of this stable package last time)
S
25 Dec 2013; Julian Ospald hasuf...@gentoo.org metadata.xml:
revert pseudo-QA commit
25 Dec 2013; Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org metadata.xml:
Remove unneeded useflag
On 12/12/2013 04:41 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
All,
We got a request from Debian to rename the rc binary of OpenRC due to
a naming conflict they have. They have a port of the att plan 9 shell,
which has a binary named rc as well[1].
My thought is to rename our rc to openrc, since that would
On 12/12/2013 05:28 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Chris Reffett creff...@gentoo.org wrote:
The idea of running a sed on inittab in an ebuild, no matter what the
context, terrifies me. Perhaps we can ease this in slowly by renaming rc -
openrc and symlinking rc -
On 12/09/2013 10:50 PM, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote:
On 12/08/2013 05:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 12:52:08AM -0500, Rick Zero_Chaos Farina wrote:
1.) If we are going to stuff this into @system then we probably want a
USE=nonet flag to allow users to not pull anything
On 12/09/2013 12:54 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
Creating a new SLOT is the most sane thing going forward; but, as the
default (:*) depends on any SLOT, this needs a half thousand commits to
fix up reverse dependencies. Thus, instead a new package is made. [1]
Pff. Lazy.
When our defaults
On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in
random package(s) a la binary-distribution
On 12/05/2013 08:13 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 07:45:22AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote:
On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote
On 11/15/2013 03:13 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Ben de Groot wrote:
As I see it now, with respect to multilib, we have three competing
solutions, but not a clear direction which way we want to go as a
distro:
1: emul-* packages
2: multilib-portage
3: multilib.eclass
On 11/14/2013 01:13 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2013-11-14, o godz. 07:49:55
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
On 11/13/2013 11:02 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
It's also worth pointing out that the whole reason why abi_x86_32 is
{package.,}use.stable.masked is because trying
On 11/14/2013 08:13 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:03 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
So just fix it as problems appear and/or we have some spare time ...
Have any problems appeared that impact anybody who hasn't tried to
take advantage of the new multilib
On 11/15/2013 01:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
So tell me, what you exactly want or need? Or is it just bare
complaining for the sake of complaining?
Well, you accidentally cut out all references to TommyD's work again.
Almost as if you don't even want to discuss a working proper solution
that
On 11/15/2013 03:35 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 20:07:39 +0100
Thomas Sachau to...@gentoo.org wrote:
- multilib-portage was planned to add features with a future EAPI
version, so in the end needs agreement from maintainers of package
managers, the pms team and the council.
On 11/13/2013 11:02 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
It's also worth pointing out that the whole reason why abi_x86_32 is
{package.,}use.stable.masked is because trying to manage the partial
transisition between emul-* and multilib-build dependencies
^^
Why is there a partial random transition
On 10/20/2013 06:18 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 10/19/2013 06:43 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
P.S.: It is interesting to see the effects of AutoRepoman beating
people to filing bugs, maybe I should write AutoNotifyman as a
response to not having the chance to file the bug in a reasonable
time
On 10/20/2013 07:41 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 10/20/2013 11:40 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
The affected packages can slowly be fixed. It's not like they are
totally broken but it's more like of another way to tell you that
a few QA problems exist and that it would be nice to fix them
On 10/16/2013 07:20 AM, Mike Auty wrote:
Hi there,
I'm updating the app-crypt/ophcrack-tables package to include the new
tables available from their site. These are basically just additional
data packages that can be useful with the app-crypt/ophcrack package,
but they're very large.
On 10/14/2013 03:32 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
All,
from what I'm seeing, we should look into converting /etc/mtab to a
symlink to /proc/self/mounts [1].
Are there any remaining concerns about doing this?
Apart from breaking umount -a and some other things?
None at all ;)
(The breakage is
On 10/14/2013 07:29 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 10/14/2013 03:32 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
All,
from what I'm seeing, we should look into converting /etc/mtab to a
symlink to /proc/self/mounts [1].
Are there any
On 09/30/2013 07:45 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
hasufell schrieb:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464536
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=470554
for the first bug:
net-libs/ortp media-libs/mediastreamer and net-voip/linphone
are from the same upstream and actually
On 09/25/2013 03:07 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 09/24/2013 07:28 PM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote:
On 09/23/2013 22:41, Markos Chandras wrote:
(unless of course you want to increase your number of cvs commits
which is a worrying argument on its own)
11:16 #gentoo-bugs: +bonsaikitten ago: do me
tl;dr: We should use EAPI5 features
I've noticed some libraries (e.g. poppler) having (almost) all their
consumers migrated to eapi5 subslots.
So upgrading those is now really neato.
Other libraries are still a bit less optimal. So there's lots of
revdep-rebuild / emerge @preserved-rebuild
On 08/15/2013 03:15 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 15 August 2013 00:42, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/15/2013 04:21 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 14 August 2013 21:17, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, hasufell wrote:
And their lack of time
On 08/14/2013 10:17 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:07:32 +0400
Sergey Popov pinkb...@gentoo.org wrote:
I am all for the standarts, but as we did not brought sets to PMS
yet(when we updated it for EAPI changes), my question is: 'why?'. It
is one of the long-standing feature
On 08/14/2013 09:02 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org
wrote:
Right now, however,
it might be useful if only to get a sense for how they're being used,
trade ideas, etc.
No, we can't. Sets are portage-specific, the tree needs to
On 08/14/2013 11:43 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 23:41:03 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/14/2013 10:17 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:07:32 +0400
Sergey Popov pinkb...@gentoo.org wrote:
I am all for the standarts, but as we did
On 08/14/2013 11:44 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 23:41:56 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/14/2013 09:02 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Michael Palimaka
kensing...@gentoo.org wrote: Right now, however,
it might be useful if only
On 08/13/2013 04:10 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
As per my comment in bugzilla [1] I said that the patch should be
submitted upstream prior having it in cvs.
Yet you decided to completely ignore my statement and just smash in the
patch anyway [2].
Please don't do this ever again. We had
On 08/14/2013 11:54 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 23:50:36 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/14/2013 11:43 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 23:41:03 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/14/2013 10:17 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote
On 08/15/2013 04:21 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 14 August 2013 21:17, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, hasufell wrote:
And their lack of time (to be polite) should not block general
progress in gentoo.
Perhaps these basic notions of how Gentoo development works
On 08/15/2013 04:56 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 14 August 2013 21:41, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/14/2013 10:17 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, hasufell wrote:
And their lack of time (to be polite) should not block general
progress in gentoo.
Perhaps these
On 08/09/2013 07:37 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org 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
On 08/09/2013 07:45 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:39:08 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
You just removed the upgrade path for users
On 08/09/2013 08:28 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org 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
On 08/09/2013 11:12 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:50:24 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev alo...@gentoo.org 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
On 08/09/2013 10:59 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:22:38 +0300
Alon Bar-Lev alo...@gentoo.org 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
On 08/09/2013 06:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:30 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org 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
On 08/09/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 19:31:22 +0800
Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org 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
On 08/08/2013 10:01 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:49 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
Seeing the noise in #gentoo from people getting whacked in the kidney by
the systemd sidegrade ... that's a very optimistic decision.
Yes it is, because our policy has
[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 not with
On 08/07/2013 09:14 PM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote:
On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 14:45 +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
Greetings,
Gnome Herd decided to target stablilization of 3.8 [1] which requires
systemd.
What are the reasons to stable 3.8 and not 3.6, a version w/o this
restriction, enabling all
On 08/08/2013 04:47 AM, hasufell wrote:
On 08/07/2013 09:55 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:32:39AM -0400, Alex Xu wrote:
AFAIK, the status is unimplemented, and nobody's working on it.
No, I did post implementation patches for much of it back when the GLEPs
were in
On 07/19/2013 02:50 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
The problem I hit usually:
There are some packages that rely on X for some tests, that way, when I
for example emerge tk, it's nearly impossible to keep working because I
get tons of windows opened and closed.
Wouldn't be better to make that
On 06/16/2013 04:37 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
# Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org (15 Jun 2013)
# Upstream dead for ages, nothing requires it, wrongly
# generated .la files (#201440). Removal in a month.
rox-base/rox-clib
No :)
I've commented out that mask in package.mask because:
On 05/01/2013 11:25 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
Since people like to start whinging threads every time we have to change flags
on gcc this is a friendly notice of some upcoming changes.
[snip lots of good ideas]
Any thoughts?
I'm in favour of unleashing 4.8 in ~arch soon - I've been building
On 03/24/2013 09:40 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
Markos Chandras wrote:
The masks are sort of announcements as you have 30 days to revert that
decision.
You don't seem to recognize the quite significant psychological
impact of you having already made the decision, compared to, say,
having an
On 02/10/2013 05:01 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
# Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org (10 Feb 2013)
# Fails with gcc-4.7, crashes (#301946, #312073), problems with
# boost (#319921), problems with python-2.7 (#338826), really old
# version in the tree, people should move to sci overlay one (#424659).
#
On 02/03/2013 09:45 PM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
On Sun, 03 Feb 2013 13:46:52 +0100
Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
dev-libs/boehm-gc
Will take this one in a few days if no one else grabs it first.
Since it's a dependency of one package I maintain (dev-lang/opendylan) I
have a
On 01/19/2013 09:39 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
Maybe x11-qt, or dev-qt, or just qt, or qt-qt if we must have a hyphen
for its own sake and we're just making senseless stuff up. qt-core
just doesn't make sense if it
On 12/26/2012 05:39 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
I know, it should be easy, and I'm probably making excuses, but it boils
down to
Well, it boils down to you needing an excuse ;)
1. People in Gentoo have asked me to/encouraged me to do the quizzes
2. I've tried several times
3. Still not there.
On 12/17/12 08:10, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 12/16/12 14:04, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 16 December 2012 16:57, Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com wrote:
Inspired by the number of packages being unmaintained -- why not use
some of that bug bounty money to fix up the recruitment
101 - 200 of 424 matches
Mail list logo
