On Friday 10 October 2008, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:32:44 +0300
>
> Mart Raudsepp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Of those, and those in overlays, and those that are going to be
> > > committed over the next few weeks, how many use src_prepare to
> > > apply security related
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:56:37 +0200
Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:48:19 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Whatever. Some of you seem to have some quite agressive dislikement
> > to it. In the end it's just a name/tag. I guess I could live
If you don't use NIS or NIS+ you can stop reading now; if you do use
NIS or NIS+...I'm so so sorry.
The basic gist is "this package is old and everyone should move to LDAP."
Consider it masked in two weeks for removal in 30 days unless a
maintainer is found.
-Alec
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:40:53 -0500
"Jeremy Olexa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a way I feel like we (the Prefix project) are mis-using the EAPI
> value.
You're misusing it in the way you treat it as a set of strings rather
than a single value. But this being an EAPI thing seems right.
> If we
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:41 AM, Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
> below, on Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:17:14 -0700:
>
>> Consider this your first and last warning from Userrel.
>
> FWIW... at least on gmane, that appears as a re
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:48:19 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whatever. Some of you seem to have some quite agressive dislikement
> to it. In the end it's just a name/tag. I guess I could live with
> anything, including c3p0.
Well, while I dislike x64 I'm more concerned about
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 19:46:55 +0200
> What's the scope of the changes? I think it'd be easiest to discuss
> this if you posted an informal summary describing the differences in
> terms of which bits of PMS are affected.
Ci
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:15:16 +0200
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, x64 is the marketing name Microsoft made up for x86_64 (aka
> > amd64, ia32e and Intel 64), as "Windows for x86_64" doesn't sound
> > that sexy, and was later adopted by Sun and others.
> > ia64/Itanium doesn't h
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:32:44 +0300
Mart Raudsepp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Of those, and those in overlays, and those that are going to be
> > committed over the next few weeks, how many use src_prepare to apply
> > security related patches?
>
> A round zero. Security patches are going stable
Fabian Groffen wrote:
Most notably, in Prefix all keywords are full GLEP53 style, which
results in e.g. amd64-linux. We did this on purpose, because in Prefix
we don't necessarily are on Gentoo Linux. We also chose to expand fbsd,
nbsd and obsd to their long variants, mainly because the short
On 10-10-2008 14:40:13 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > - x64 is what the vendors (Apple, Sun) advertise themselves
>
> Err I'm sure I haven't seen any x64 in the documentation or
> advertisement of my MacBook Pro, are you sure _Apple_ use
"Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Fri, 10 Oct 2008 00:17:14 -0700:
> Consider this your first and last warning from Userrel.
FWIW... at least on gmane, that appears as a response to aballier (gentoo
dev), with references headers indicating the same
Fabian Groffen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> - x64 is what the vendors (Apple, Sun) advertise themselves
Err I'm sure I haven't seen any x64 in the documentation or
advertisement of my MacBook Pro, are you sure _Apple_ uses that totally
bogus name?
Anyway, em64t might be better, but then again y
On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 20:11 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> ia64-hpux
There's one thing to say for this platform to avoid later confusion:
'ia64-hpux' is the keyword for 32bit on that platform.
'ia64w-hpux' would be the 64bit keyword (not in prefix-tree yet).
This might seem confusing, bu
I don't want to be the guy that kicks people off lists; but I will do
it; so keep the thread on topic[0] and be nice[1]. I know everyone
here is capable of that. Feel free to sling the personal crap
comments somewhere more appropriate (such as a personal diary, blog,
or in verbal complaints to a
On 10-10-2008 04:21:23 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > >> amd64-linux
> > >> x64-openbsd
> > >> x64-solaris
> > >
> > > Is there a special reason why you're using "x64" instead of "amd64"
> > > in those cases? (IMO x64 is the most stupid name for the x86_64
> > > architecture)
> >
> > AFAIK, th
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 15:22:19 -0700
> Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So where exactly is this "sky is falling" issue you're worried
>> about? Bugs happen.
>
> It means anyone using EAPI 2 now is going to encount
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 09:25:55 -0500
> Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 05:30 Wed 01 Oct , Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
>> > vote on, let us
18 matches
Mail list logo
