[deleted]
All seems fair enough, but please fix portage qa issues before this
policy is applied (see bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123733).
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Daniel Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> The above also has to be done on a case by case basis, if hardmasking a
> package would cause wide tree breakage itself then another choice has to
> be made.
I agree. We aren't here to make a situation even worse, and we
acknowledge that we won't always g
Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Here is my updated version after some feedback from people:
>
> * The QA team's purpose is to provide cross-team assistance in keeping
> the tree in a good state. This is done primarily by finding and pointing
> out issues to maintainers and, where neces
Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Mark Loeser wrote:
> > Here is my updated version after some feedback from people:
> > * In the case of disagreement on policy among QA members, the majority
> > of established QA members must agree with the action.
>
> What is an "Established QA member"?
Mark Loeser wrote:
> Here is my updated version after some feedback from people:
> * In the case of disagreement on policy among QA members, the majority
> of established QA members must agree with the action.
What is an "Established QA member"?
>
>
> I guess this won't be reviewed by the cou
Here is my updated version after some feedback from people:
* The QA team's purpose is to provide cross-team assistance in keeping
the tree in a good state. This is done primarily by finding and pointing
out issues to maintainers and, where necessary, taking direct action.
* In case of emergen
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:35, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> Does anyone have any other suggestions?
i dont know exactly what you're trying to accomplish, but the way wine does it
is by faking out the ssp symbols
in their loader, they add (for gcc-4.1+):
void *__stack_chk_guard = 0;
void _stack_chk_
On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 00:41 +, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 March 2006 17:41, solar wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 17:17 +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > > I presume it's a gentoo patch to gcc-4 to add back in
> > > -fno-stack-protector?
> >
> > For the 4.0.x it should be just a dummy
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 17:41, solar wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 17:17 +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > I presume it's a gentoo patch to gcc-4 to add back in
> > -fno-stack-protector?
>
> For the 4.0.x it should be just a dummy call.
> For 4.1 it is included. What does change and is really unc
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 04:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
> Gentoo dev list to see.
so, GLEP44 is up right ? any last questions ? /me looks at solar
genone: can
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 19:19, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Unless there are any huge flaws found, I'd like this to be voted on by
> the council -- looks like it'll have to wait until April's meeting to
> fit in with the two weeks rule.
may push council meeting back to 3rd tuesday if people wish
-m
Attached is the final draft. No substantial changes since last time,
just wording cleanups and a few clarifications. You'll be able to see
it here in an hour or three (check the dates!):
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0042.html
Or you can try to read the attached RST source, but no moani
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 12:17, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 11:39 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:35, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > > gcc-3 supports both -nopie and -fno-stack-protector. So always using
> > > these would be ok if it were not for gcc-4 wh
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 17:17 +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 11:39 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:35, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > > gcc-3 supports both -nopie and -fno-stack-protector. So always using
> > > these would be ok if it were not for gcc-4 w
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 11:39 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:35, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > gcc-3 supports both -nopie and -fno-stack-protector. So always using
> > these would be ok if it were not for gcc-4 which doesn't grok
> > -fno-stack-protector.
>
> yes it does
Oh
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 02:37, Jakub Moc wrote:
> 28.2.2006, 16:29:10, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > The whole devrel handbook is policy, except where otherwise noted. See
> > Mike's reply.
>
> Then any significant change there requires a sane procedure.
which does not change the fact that the dev
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:35, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> gcc-3 supports both -nopie and -fno-stack-protector. So always using
> these would be ok if it were not for gcc-4 which doesn't grok
> -fno-stack-protector.
yes it does
every gcc in portage by default supports -fno-stack-protector
-mike
--
All,
I'm hoping for some suggestions particularly from the toolchain and
hardened profile folk.
We have a compiler that goes via C and uses gcc as it's backend. This
compiler does some pretty unpleasant things with the assembler output of
gcc. For one thing it doesn't use the C stack. It strips o
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the
2nd Thursday once a month), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
Gentoo dev
On 3/1/06, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > Hola all.
> >
> > Been an interesting two some years, but have decided it's time for me
> > to turn in my resignation and wander on to things outside of gentoo.
> >
> > If you need to track me down, I'll be checking [E
Donnie Berkholz posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on
Wed, 01 Mar 2006 01:51:03 -0800:
> Brian Harring wrote:
>>
>> Been an interesting two some years, but have decided it's time for me
>> to turn in my resignation and wander on to things outside of gentoo.
>>
>> If you need to track
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:30:24 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | OK, so kernel-2.eclass is abusing the slot as well, go scream on
> | kernel devs.
>
> No. kernel-2 installs sources, not an actual package.
Not exactly. The webapp stuff gets installed to /usr/sha
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 16:31, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:17:20 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> | On Tuesday 28 February 2006 15:52, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > Yes, it's an utterly trivial problem, but it is a QA violation.
> | > Getting a complete l
1.3.2006, 13:09:55, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Tuesday 28 February 2006 21:20, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> | > if [ "${IS_UPGRADE}" = "1" ] ; then
>> | > einfo "Removing old version ${REMOVE_PKG}"
>> | >
>> | > emerge -C "${REMOVE_PKG}"
>> | > fi
> This code (or an equival
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 00:08, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> dont get me wrong, i wasnt implying that bugs shouldnt be filed ... i was
> addressing the incorrect idea that it isnt a valid QA issue unless a user
> experiences it and complains via bugzilla
I agree with this. I would however also like
On Tuesday 28 February 2006 21:20, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:09:02 +0100 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | 28.2.2006, 18:38:10, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > Sheesh, you'll probably claim that this isn't broken next too:
> | >
> | > if [ "${IS_UPGRADE}" = "1" ] ; the
Luca Longinotti wrote:
> As the title says, what would you prefer for the future of MySQL in
Gentoo?
> Please take a moment to read
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-438557.html and vote (and
> eventually comment on it).
> Thanks!
I've asked to Luca to have one week poll but the results [1]
1.3.2006, 11:29:47, Danny van Dyk wrote:
>> > | Where is a coding style problem related to quality of code in general
>> > | and assurance in particular? > > It's more relevant than you might
>> think. Screwing up layout like that > breaks various QA checking tools
>> that assume that things are
Am Mittwoch, 1. März 2006 08:21 schrieb Jakub Moc:
> 28.2.2006, 16:31:26, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:17:20 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > | On Tuesday 28 February 2006 15:52, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | >> Yes, it's an utterly trivial problem, but it is a QA viol
On Wednesday 01 March 2006 10:37, Brian Harring wrote:
> Been an interesting two some years, but have decided it's time for me
> to turn in my resignation and wander on to things outside of gentoo.
I'm a bit sad hearing that, as it's always sad to hear that a good fellow dev
goes away... but Donni
Brian Harring wrote:
> Hola all.
>
> Been an interesting two some years, but have decided it's time for me
> to turn in my resignation and wander on to things outside of gentoo.
>
> If you need to track me down, I'll be checking [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
>
> So... yeah, so long and thanks for all the
31 matches
Mail list logo
