Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Mon, 2017-05-15 at 15:33 -0400, Yury German wrote: > I would prefer PPC and for that matter arm (which are no longer > security > supported) going the Non-stable route. This would prevent the need > for > stabilization and everything but @system we can instruct the users to > use ~ppc. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

I would prefer PPC and for that matter arm (which are no longer security supported) going the Non-stable route. This would prevent the need for stabilization and everything but @system we can instruct the users to use ~ppc. This would also allow for security to not drop it from security supported

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 04:56:29PM +, James McMechan wrote > Silly Notes: > While I personally considered IA64 useless shortly after arrival, > Intel has just (5/11/17) announced another bump in that family the > 9700 Series. And it will also be the last Itanium released

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

> > > The easiest solution is for the arch team to remove keywords until they > > > have a reasonable response time again. And if the arch team doesn't do > > > that by itself, well, ... > > > > > > Having one-man teams block everybody else hurts Gentoo as a whole. > > > > We have appropriate

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/14/17 6:38 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > On 05/08/2017 09:13 PM, David Seifert wrote: >> If all of this ends in one big bikeshedding fest again, I will start >> dekeywording packages. Fortunately for me, I won't get any complaints >> (because the arch teams are dead). > formal complaint, powerpc

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 05/14/2017 01:05 PM, Michał Górny wrote: On nie, 2017-05-14 at 12:52 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: On 05/14/2017 12:44 PM, David Seifert wrote: On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 12:38 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: On 05/08/2017 09:13 PM, David Seifert wrote: If all of this ends in one big bikeshedding

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On nie, 2017-05-14 at 12:52 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: > On 05/14/2017 12:44 PM, David Seifert wrote: > > On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 12:38 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: > > > On 05/08/2017 09:13 PM, David Seifert wrote: > > > > If all of this ends in one big bikeshedding fest again, I will > > > > start

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 05/14/2017 12:44 PM, David Seifert wrote: On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 12:38 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: On 05/08/2017 09:13 PM, David Seifert wrote: If all of this ends in one big bikeshedding fest again, I will start dekeywording packages. Fortunately for me, I won't get any complaints (because

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Sun, 2017-05-14 at 12:38 +0200, Michael Weber wrote: > On 05/08/2017 09:13 PM, David Seifert wrote: > > If all of this ends in one big bikeshedding fest again, I will > > start > > dekeywording packages. Fortunately for me, I won't get any > > complaints > > (because the arch teams are dead). >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 05/08/2017 09:13 PM, David Seifert wrote: If all of this ends in one big bikeshedding fest again, I will start dekeywording packages. Fortunately for me, I won't get any complaints (because the arch teams are dead). formal complaint, powerpc team is alive, and I'm lead. -- Michael Weber

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/11/17 3:17 AM, Yury German wrote: > David, > > I never said anything about stablizing. But that is fine, thank you for > the answers. > > Blueness, > > When are you proposing to making the changes. As we are about to drop > sparc from security supported arches, so we might as well add PPC

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:50 AM, David Seifert wrote: > 1. ppc(= 32 bit) will be massively dekeyworded, ppc64 will stay > unchanged (also given that it is an active arch in general and gets CPU > upgrades from IBM/OpenPOWER). Sounds good. You started the thread also talking

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

David, I never said anything about stablizing. But that is fine, thank you for the answers. Blueness, When are you proposing to making the changes. As we are about to drop sparc from security supported arches, so we might as well add PPC to the list. On 5/10/17 11:50 PM, David Seifert wrote: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 22:01 -0700, Yury German wrote: > > On 5/10/17 12:40 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > On 5/10/17 3:29 PM, David Seifert wrote: > > So let's make sure we're on the same page -- here's my > > understanding. > > > > 1) For @system packages, we will have KEYWORDS="ppc" for the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/10/17 12:40 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > On 5/10/17 3:29 PM, David Seifert wrote: > So let's make sure we're on the same page -- here's my understanding. > > 1) For @system packages, we will have KEYWORDS="ppc" for the stable > versions and KEYWORDS="~ppc" for the rest. So is this only

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 15:40 -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > On 5/10/17 3:29 PM, David Seifert wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 22:24 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > > > Ühel kenal päeval, K, 10.05.2017 kell 15:01, kirjutas Anthony G. > > > Basile: > > > > On 5/10/17 11:08 AM, William Hubbs wrote:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/10/17 3:29 PM, David Seifert wrote: > On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 22:24 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: >> Ühel kenal päeval, K, 10.05.2017 kell 15:01, kirjutas Anthony G. >> Basile: >>> On 5/10/17 11:08 AM, William Hubbs wrote: On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:04:54AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 22:24 +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > Ühel kenal päeval, K, 10.05.2017 kell 15:01, kirjutas Anthony G. > Basile: > > On 5/10/17 11:08 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:04:54AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Anthony

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Ühel kenal päeval, K, 10.05.2017 kell 15:01, kirjutas Anthony G. Basile: > On 5/10/17 11:08 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:04:54AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Anthony G. Basile > > o.org> wrote: > > > > I maintain

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/10/17 11:08 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:04:54AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: >> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Anthony G. Basile >> wrote: >>> I maintain quite a few ppc stage3's for uclibc and musl. I would >>> appreciate keeping ppc as is.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:04:54AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > I maintain quite a few ppc stage3's for uclibc and musl. I would > > appreciate keeping ppc as is. It is still a useful arch for many > > devices

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > I maintain quite a few ppc stage3's for uclibc and musl. I would > appreciate keeping ppc as is. It is still a useful arch for many > devices today, eg. some high end Mikrotik routers. So are you willing to do the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 05/09/2017 09:36 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > Perhaps I'm missing the issue, but can you just follow the dependencies > and drop keywords accordingly so the tree remains consistent. > If we can make it policy that I'm allowed to edit a bunch of other peoples' packages and de-keyword

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 08/05/2017 15:49, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 8 maja 2017 15:27:18 CEST, Dirkjan Ochtman > napisał(a): >> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Mikle Kolyada >> wrote: >>> Against. Do not touch things you are not

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/9/17 8:33 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 05/09/2017 04:12 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Yury German wrote: >>> >>> we can not call for cleanup or release the GLSA, >>> waiting for a stabilization of a non-core package, while the actual

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 05/09/2017 04:12 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Yury German wrote: >> >> we can not call for cleanup or release the GLSA, >> waiting for a stabilization of a non-core package, while the actual >> package has been in a tree in ~arch status for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 5/9/17 8:01 AM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > On 2017-05-09 10:12, Rich Freeman wrote: >> Why not? If an arch is considered a non-security-supported arch >> then you would just ignore it in a security bug. > > We dropped security coverage already for ia64 and are in the process to > drop it for

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 2017-05-09 10:12, Rich Freeman wrote: > Why not? If an arch is considered a non-security-supported arch > then you would just ignore it in a security bug. We dropped security coverage already for ia64 and are in the process to drop it for sparc as well. So how do you want to cleanup a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Yury German wrote: > > we can not call for cleanup or release the GLSA, > waiting for a stabilization of a non-core package, while the actual > package has been in a tree in ~arch status for weeks or months. Why not? If an arch is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Rich, Core should be fine to have a system that at least boots. And security still tracks ~arch's to get the system secured by removing vulnerable packages as time permits. We can not have an arch though blocking the security of the whole distribution because we can not call for cleanup or

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Am Montag, 8. Mai 2017, 21:08:26 CEST schrieb Mikle Kolyada: > > The easiest solution is for the arch team to remove keywords until they > > have a reasonable response time again. And if the arch team doesn't do > > that by itself, well, ... > > > > Having one-man teams block everybody else

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

> > I have not seen the draft of proper reverting these arches to exp or > dev, if it will be like sh or s390, better kill the horse like debian > did to alpha and hppa, without riding it. The current state of sh and s390 happened because vapier suggested the profiles should become "exp". My

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

08.05.2017 22:21, David Seifert пишет: > On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 22:08 +0300, Mikle Kolyada wrote: >> We have appropriate hardware if people wanna do the work, jut go & >> make >> things better :), I do not think someone from existing arch teams has >> something against that > Ok so let me get the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Ühel kenal päeval, E, 08.05.2017 kell 22:08, kirjutas Mikle Kolyada: > > 08.05.2017 21:55, Andreas K. Huettel пишет: > > Am Montag, 8. Mai 2017, 12:49:32 CEST schrieb Mikle Kolyada: > > > Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has > > > already > > > dropped m68k s390 and sh

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 22:08 +0300, Mikle Kolyada wrote: > We have appropriate hardware if people wanna do the work, jut go & > make > things better :), I do not think someone from existing arch teams has > something against that Ok so let me get the logic right: 1) Arch teams can add their

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Mon, 2017-05-08 at 13:49 +0300, Mikle Kolyada wrote: > Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has > already > dropped m68k s390 and sh to exp few years ago. Now we have a big mess > there and only, while ia64 sparc and co have slow but progress and > mature enough stable

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

08.05.2017 21:55, Andreas K. Huettel пишет: > Am Montag, 8. Mai 2017, 12:49:32 CEST schrieb Mikle Kolyada: >> Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has already >> dropped m68k s390 and sh to exp few years ago. Now we have a big mess >> there and only, while ia64 sparc and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Am Montag, 8. Mai 2017, 12:49:32 CEST schrieb Mikle Kolyada: > > Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has already > dropped m68k s390 and sh to exp few years ago. Now we have a big mess > there and only, while ia64 sparc and co have slow but progress and > mature enough

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: >> >> It isn't like security project adds any additional load to any arch >> team, an architecture capable to keep up with normal keyword and >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Dnia 8 maja 2017 15:27:18 CEST, Dirkjan Ochtman napisał(a): >On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Mikle Kolyada >wrote: >> Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has >already >> dropped m68k s390 and sh to exp few years ago. Now we have a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > > It isn't like security project adds any additional load to any arch > team, an architecture capable to keep up with normal keyword and > stabilization requests should also be able to keep up with security. What

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Mikle Kolyada wrote: > Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has already > dropped m68k s390 and sh to exp few years ago. Now we have a big mess > there and only, while ia64 sparc and co have slow but progress and >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On 2017-05-07 21:23, David Seifert wrote: > TL;DR > ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long > time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its > resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. > Let us please drop these 3 archs

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

07.05.2017 22:23, David Seifert пишет: > TL;DR > ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long > time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its > resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. > Let us please drop these 3 archs to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Sun, 07 May 2017 22:53:52 +0200 David Seifert wrote: > This is probably the smaller problem. The link shows a bug where none > of the aforementioned arch teams have keyworded the requested packages > in 4 months. How would the arches.desc proposal fix "dead arch teams"? >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Sun, 2017-05-07 at 22:24 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: > I'm against. Turning more arches into dev/exp only introduces hidden > depgraph breakages. I think it'd be better if we looked into > the arch.desc proposal and just disabled stable keywords for those > architectures. > This is probably

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

Am Sonntag, 7. Mai 2017, 22:24:35 CEST schrieb Michał Górny: > > > Anyhow, I formally request the Council to vote on dropping these archs > > to unstable/exp profiles for the next Council meeting, explicitly > > overriding any arch concerns that are likely to awake now and going to > > be running

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On nie, 2017-05-07 at 21:23 +0200, David Seifert wrote: > TL;DR > ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long > time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its > resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. > Let us please drop

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 9:23 PM, David Seifert wrote: > TL;DR > ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long > time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its > resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. > Let

[gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

TL;DR ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. Let us please drop these 3 archs to dev profiles to ease maintenance. Dear all, I'd