On Sunday 22 October 2006 01:45, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> Let's look at reality here, OK?
any reality that includes you makes me laugh
-mike
pgpQkziHkIs8I.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
>
>> So, are you proposing to encourage people to do commits for
>> the sake of commits? Make people do revbumps/keywording
>> just to get their commits in, without doing proper testing?
>> Or to hold on number of commits till commitfest?
>>
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> So, are you proposing to encourage people to do commits for
> the sake of commits? Make people do revbumps/keywording
> just to get their commits in, without doing proper testing?
> Or to hold on number of commits till commitfest?
I would hope that people would b
dev-lang/swi-prolog-lite is masked and will be removed from the tree in 30
days.
Standalone 'lite' versions of SWI's prolog have not been released upstream for
four years. The remaining full-versioned ebuilds in dev-lang/swi-prolog-lite
are outdated and buggy development snapshots.
All active
On Saturday 21 October 2006 10:05, Roy Marples wrote:
> baselayout-1.13 now handles multiple provides. That means that you have can
> 3 or more services that provide "logger" and baselayout will pick the right
> one based on what's running, then what's run the runlevel and finally
> alphabetical or
On 10/21/06, Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RC_STRICT_NET_CHECKING is used in the init script depdency process, and quite
frankly I'd like to punt it and replace it with ... rc-update! Yes,
just put the init scripts that "net" should provide in your runlevel. boot
contains net.lo
On Saturday 21 October 2006 04:53, Roy Bamford wrote:
> "cut off" as in nothing for i386 or leave i386 at glibc-2.5?
i havent really decided ... i would like to settle on one version though for
no-nptl/i386/glibc-compat20/etc...
> What is the lowest IA32 arch that will be supported ?
i486
-mike
Simon Stelling wrote:
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
>
>>> | No worries, there are people who even wanted to merge amd64 with x86.
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's almost as daft as suggesting a single keyword to cover
>>> both sparc v8 and sparc v9, or ip22 and ip27.
>>>
>>>
>> Err... No, IP
Hi all,
this announce is aimed at everyone who commits to eselect's repository.
As of r326, the eselect SVN repository contains a 1.0.x branch. Trunk
will now be used for the upcoming 1.2.x release.
In future, please
* Fix bugs of existing modules in trunk/ and backport them to
branches/branc
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 09:35:06PM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:31:31 -0700
> Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Be aware that if you reuse the vercmp logic, you're getting the
> > special case float comparison rules, meaning 1.02 is less then 1.1 in
> > compariso
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
>> | No worries, there are people who even wanted to merge amd64 with x86.
>>
>> Yeah, that's almost as daft as suggesting a single keyword to cover
>> both sparc v8 and sparc v9, or ip22 and ip27.
>>
> Err... No, IP22 and IP27 are nearly identical as far as use
It's my pleasure to introduce to you Jurek "jurek" Bartuszek. He is
joining is to help with the dotnet packages. He lists Windows API and
linux kernel programming among his many talents. I wonder how well those
two get along :)
He hails from Warsaw, Polad and is a full time student
at Warsaw Unive
*wow*
Thank you for all the hard work in pulling this together. Congrats to
everyone,
~mcummings (weeve, this is the year of the softserve)
On Sat, 2006-10-21 at 18:29 +0200, Alexandre Buisse wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> here are our 2006 trustees :
>
> seemant
> g2boojum
> wolf31o2
> mcummings
>
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 20:40:45 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:35:06 +0200 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | Still have the issue with the = operator though, not sure which way
> | to go there:
>
> The = operator (without a *) shouldn't ever be
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 21:35:06 +0200 Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Still have the issue with the = operator though, not sure which way
| to go there:
The = operator (without a *) shouldn't ever be used in ebuilds or
profiles. Not using the ~ operator is asking for disaster...
--
Ciaran
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:31:31 -0700
Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 02:27:19PM +, Philip Walls wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 02:34:08PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:51:19 + Philip Walls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
>
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:24:59 +0200
Tobias Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think this is a fun way to build some team spirit.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I think it's a *very* bad idea - both from a QA and a "team spirit"
> point of view.
> Instead of having such "commitfests" and bounties f
Mike Kelly wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:21:37 -0400
"Caleb Cushing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was thinking a while back (dangerous) ;-). That it would be a good
idea to have a global use flag for all packages that have related vim
syntax ebuilds. say I set the use flag (let's call it vim-sy
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:21:37 -0400
"Caleb Cushing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was thinking a while back (dangerous) ;-). That it would be a good
> idea to have a global use flag for all packages that have related vim
> syntax ebuilds. say I set the use flag (let's call it vim-syntax) for
> pam
Alin Nastac wrote:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't amd64 and ia64 architectures
nearly the same? Beside 3dnow/sse instruction sets of course.
If so, shouldn't we have the same kewords ("amd64 ia64", "~amd64 ~ia64"
or none) on every package that don't use 3dnow/sse instructions?
no, th
Ditto :) I'd also like to thank Grant for taking care of the counting
etc at the end of the election, and for being my rock in Gentooland.
And big thanks to Ciaran for jump-starting the movement to have another
round of nominations and elections -- they were certainly successful the
second time :)
My thanks to nattfodd and KingTaco for processing the votes in
the recent Trustee election. Thanks also go to Seemant who
got the election rolling, agriffis who wrote the votify/countify
software and who was nice enough to generate the previous roster of
Foundation members, infra who generated a
Attached.
Thanks to all who voted!
-g2boojum-
--
Grant Goodyear
Gentoo Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
agaffney
agriffis
amne
anpereir
astinus
axxo
azarah
bass
batlogg
bcowan
beejay
bennyc
betelgeus
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 18:37:46 +0200 Alexandre Buisse
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Here comes the master ballot for the trustees election. Personal
| confirmation emails will follow in a little while.
Aaand the graphs. You know how these work by now.
seemant (1) g2boojum (2) wolf31o2 (3)
|
Here comes the master ballot for the trustees election. Personal
confirmation emails will follow in a little while.
- confirmation 299e -
g2boojum
seemant
wolf31o2
rl03
mcummings
pauldv
stuart
- confirmation 2afa -
seemant g2boojum mcummings wolf31o2
rl03
pauldv stu
Hi everyone,
here are our 2006 trustees :
seemant
g2boojum
wolf31o2
mcummings
stuart
Master ballot and personal confirmation emails will follow.
Thanks to KingTaco and g2boojum for the technical support :)
Congratulations to our new trustees!
For reference, the complete ranked list is:
seemant
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 02:27:19PM +, Philip Walls wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 02:34:08PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:51:19 + Philip Walls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > | This argument here can also be applied to the -r#.# solution you
> > | mentioned,
Mike Doty wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Just a random thought that popped into my head:
We could have a commit fest where everyone who wants to compete kicks in
some small amount of money(say $5) maybe the foundation kicks in a
little something too. Then the person with
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 14:17:32 +0200 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | No worries, there are people who even wanted to merge amd64 with x86.
>
> Yeah, that's almost as daft as suggesting a single keyword to cover
> both sparc v8 and sparc v9, or ip22 and ip27.
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:21:37 -0400 "Caleb Cushing"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| I was thinking a while back (dangerous) ;-). That it would be a good
| idea to have a global use flag for all packages that have related vim
| syntax ebuilds. say I set the use flag (let's call it vim-syntax) for
| pam,
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 02:34:08PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:51:19 + Philip Walls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | This argument here can also be applied to the -r#.# solution you
> | mentioned, so I think the decision between -r#.# and -local# is really
> | just a
I was thinking a while back (dangerous) ;-). That it would be a good
idea to have a global use flag for all packages that have related vim
syntax ebuilds. say I set the use flag (let's call it vim-syntax) for
pam, then it would pull app-vim/pam-syntax, there are I think at least
20 syntax ebuilds.
Hi List
Whilst working on a new C program to work out init script dependencies (99%
done and working and very very fast) it suddenly struct me as to why we still
have RC_STRICT_NET_CHECKING (see conf.d/rc for what it does).
baselayout-1.13 now handles multiple provides. That means that you have
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 03:27:24PM +0200, Simon Stelling wrote:
> Joel Martin wrote:
> >Instead of -rY-localX, I do -rX0Y the following in my local overlays.
> >This gets the same effect and maintains both version numbers. And if
> >you are worried about a revision number exceeding 99, then just do
Simon Stelling wrote: [Sat Oct 21 2006, 09:27:24AM EDT]
> This only assures that your version will be preferred as long as the
> version number is the same, but is really not what malverian is after.
true.
--
Joel Martin (kanaka)
Open Source
no BILL . no GATES
Costs nothin
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:51:19 + Philip Walls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| This argument here can also be applied to the -r#.# solution you
| mentioned, so I think the decision between -r#.# and -local# is really
| just a matter of aesthetics. I'm on the fence as to which is best.
The -r#.#.#.#
Joel Martin wrote:
Instead of -rY-localX, I do -rX0Y the following in my local overlays.
This gets the same effect and maintains both version numbers. And if
you are worried about a revision number exceeding 99, then just do
-rX00Y. This works without requiring code change to portage.
This only
Instead of -rY-localX, I do -rX0Y the following in my local overlays.
This gets the same effect and maintains both version numbers. And if
you are worried about a revision number exceeding 99, then just do
-rX00Y. This works without requiring code change to portage.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 14:17:32 +0200 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| No worries, there are people who even wanted to merge amd64 with x86.
Yeah, that's almost as daft as suggesting a single keyword to cover
both sparc v8 and sparc v9, or ip22 and ip27.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 11:43:34 +0200 Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| fixing the mess left by others (given we could commit slightly off
| stuff in 8 hours) is a pretty equivalent way to raise the commits
| level.
Fixing the mess left by others is a lot harder than making a mess to
begin wi
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 05:26:00PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 11:05:22PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > In designing an enterprise infrastructure around Gentoo at my place of
> > employment, I have discovered a feature that would improve Gentoo's
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 09:22:04AM +0200, George Shapovalov wrote:
> , 21. ?? 2006 01:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> :
> [...]
> > I'm writing to ask for your opinion on a change to sys-apps/portage that
> > would allow users to maintain local revisions of ebu
Alin Nastac wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
my guess is you're confusing EM64T and IA64 ... in that case, people with
EM64T cpu's use the amd64 KEYWORD
yeah, I confused those 2 arches :-[
No worries, there are people who even wanted to merge amd64 with x86.
Now if that's not rofl-worthy...
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 23:44:50 -0700
"Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's not the commits that should be encouraged - it's the
> bug fixing, and GWN section on bugzilla stats is pretty good.
Actually, bug fixing, i.e. closing bugs, is not representative of the
work you put
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 11:05:44 +
Francesco Riosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> may be the time to add a new arch "386" ?
If by new arch you mean new KEYWORD, no. It's pointless, and you'd
have a hell of a time finding anyone to maintain the keywords. A
seperate i386 profile under default-linux/x
Roy Bamford ha scritto:
> On 2006.10.21 09:02, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> we're going to have to cut off support for i386 targets starting with
>> glibc-2.6 ... the upstream plans are to require TLS and i386 does not
>> have
>> the atomic instructions required to support it
>>
>> some other implicati
I was going to reply to this, but I think Tobias just said everything I
was planning to. The first sentence in particular.
On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:24:59 +0200
Tobias Scherbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think this is a fun way to build some team spirit.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I think it's a
> I think this is a fun way to build some team spirit.
>
> Thoughts?
I think it's a *very* bad idea - both from a QA and a "team spirit"
point of view.
Instead of having such "commitfests" and bounties for the one who
managed to get as many as possible commits done within - say - 5 minutes
I'd ra
Luca Barbato wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
It's offering incentives to get as many commits as possible. The
easiest way to get as many commits as possible is to go on a mass
keywording or stabling spree. It'd be very easy for someone to do a
Manson -- do you really think no-one would? Even if n
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> It's offering incentives to get as many commits as possible. The
> easiest way to get as many commits as possible is to go on a mass
> keywording or stabling spree. It'd be very easy for someone to do a
> Manson -- do you really think no-one would? Even if no-one does t
On 2006.10.21 09:02, Mike Frysinger wrote:
we're going to have to cut off support for i386 targets starting with
glibc-2.6 ... the upstream plans are to require TLS and i386 does not
have
the atomic instructions required to support it
some other implications ... the glibc-compat20 people will al
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> my guess is you're confusing EM64T and IA64 ... in that case, people with
> EM64T cpu's use the amd64 KEYWORD
>
yeah, I confused those 2 arches :-[
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:00:26 -0500 Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I think this is a fun way to build some team spirit.
I think it's a fun way to ruin QA by encouraging peop
On Saturday 21 October 2006 04:04, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't amd64 and ia64 architectures
> nearly the same?
rofl not a chance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IA64
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD64
my guess is you're confusing EM64T and IA64 ... in that case, pe
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 11:04:03AM +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't amd64 and ia64 architectures
> nearly the same? Beside 3dnow/sse instruction sets of course.
> If so, shouldn't we have the same kewords ("amd64 ia64", "~amd64 ~ia64"
> or none) on every package
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't amd64 and ia64 architectures
nearly the same? Beside 3dnow/sse instruction sets of course.
If so, shouldn't we have the same kewords ("amd64 ia64", "~amd64 ~ia64"
or none) on every package that don't use 3dnow/sse instructions?
I only ask this because I th
we're going to have to cut off support for i386 targets starting with
glibc-2.6 ... the upstream plans are to require TLS and i386 does not have
the atomic instructions required to support it
some other implications ... the glibc-compat20 people will also be stuck with
glibc-2.5 (as that implie
субота, 21. жовтень 2006 01:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ви написали:
[...]
> I'm writing to ask for your opinion on a change to sys-apps/portage that
> would allow users to maintain local revisions of ebuilds, such as
> "net-www/apache-2.0.58-r2-local1".
[...]
Um, I am not clear on what exactly your app
58 matches
Mail list logo
