On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:04:11 +0100
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Maybe we also need a guideline that whenever possible, ebuilds should
> accept the default USE flags from our profiles as a valid combination?
> Or, in the exceptional case when that isn't possible, a package.use
> entry should be added to
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:30 AM, Joshua Saddler wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 22:42:52 +0100
> "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> Can anaconda give the user a shell at any point of the
>> installation? Is it possible to manually skip the automated steps?
>
> Last I checked, Anaconda was designed for bi
Francesco R posted on Wed, 09 Feb 2011 13:32:36 +0100 as excerpted:
> 2011/2/9 Ryan Hill
>
>> On Tue, 08 Feb 2011 09:52:55 +0100
>> "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>>
>> > It seems that with glibc-2.13 there are some serious compatibility
>> > issues. [H]ow about creating news item with detailed
>>
On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 22:42:52 +0100
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> Can anaconda give the user a shell at any point of the
> installation? Is it possible to manually skip the automated steps?
Last I checked, Anaconda was designed for binary installations,
originally for RPM-based systems. Trying to s
On 02/08/2011 06:20 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> The guideline I usually follow is that flags depending on another flag being
> set (eg. png needs X) should be ignored (you can always ewarn). For flags
> that conflict with other flags (exactly one of many, if-this-not-this) use
> REQUIRED_USE. Does tha
talk to igli on freenode as he's the author of a Gentoo based installer
named Gen2, perhaps he will be interested in this project. You can
checkout current sources at
git@213.131.245.114:gent2.git.
I hope this won't be another GLI failed project but i have faith it
won't.
On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 2
On 2/9/11 10:33 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> What would be the main goals of this installer?
> Could you elaborate a high level description of it?
> As I said in the past, beside some annoying deps, anaconda already
> works for Sabayon and working on a pure Gentoo module would be quite
> easy. In c
What would be the main goals of this installer?
Could you elaborate a high level description of it?
As I said in the past, beside some annoying deps, anaconda already
works for Sabayon and working on a pure Gentoo module would be quite
easy. In change you get one of the most reliable graphical inst
2011/2/9 Michał Górny
>
> On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:32:36 +0100
> Francesco R wrote:
>
> > Since the upgrade I do get portage emerging text files .sh, .conf and
> > such as file of the exact same size but filled of \0, luckily most
> > upgrade fails.
>
> I've seen similar issue in bug #353907 [1] but
On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 10:26:19AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I have heard similar complaints about GLSAmaker. I half-wonder if it
> would make more sense to just edit the xml files directly and validate
> them with a tool, and send out an email, if the tool really is that
> bad.
a3li has been w
This is a post-FOSDEM call for people with interest for a Gentoo
text-based installer.
If you are a developer, or Gentoo user, and feel like spending some time
on (possibly) creating a text-based installer for Gentoo in cooperation
with others, please contact me (off-list).
During FOSDEM, I've be
On 10:26 Wed 09 Feb , Rich Freeman wrote:
> I have heard similar complaints about GLSAmaker. I half-wonder if it
> would make more sense to just edit the xml files directly and validate
> them with a tool, and send out an email, if the tool really is that
> bad.
If this is really the probl
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:08 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
wrote:
> I think http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/vulnerability-policy.xml
> specifies the target delay, and also mentions temporary GLSAs.
> Unfortunately, that process does not seem to be followed due to general
> difficulty of drafting GLSAs
On 2/9/11 2:57 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Perhaps we should target having glsas published within a certain
> amount of time after a vulnerability is disclosed, whether corrected
> or not. We could re-publish a final notice once all is well. We
> really shouldn't consider users safe from a security
On 09-02-2011 08:57:25 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Perhaps we should target having glsas published within a certain
> amount of time after a vulnerability is disclosed, whether corrected
> or not. We could re-publish a final notice once all is well. We
> really shouldn't consider users safe from
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 08-02-2011 18:46:32 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> > Other than monitoring bugzilla, how does a Gentoo user even know that they
>> > have a package pending a security update? It seems like glsa's lag
>> > stabilization by a consider
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 13:32:36 +0100
Francesco R wrote:
> Since the upgrade I do get portage emerging text files .sh, .conf and
> such as file of the exact same size but filled of \0, luckily most
> upgrade fails.
I've seen similar issue in bug #353907 [1] but there they blame
coreutils and/or btrf
2011/2/9 Ryan Hill
> On Tue, 08 Feb 2011 09:52:55 +0100
> "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>
> > It seems that with glibc-2.13 there are some serious compatibility
> > issues. There are good warnings on the planet
> > (http://psykil.livejournal.com/340806.html), but not every ~arch user
> > reads the
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2011, Ryan Hill wrote:
>> If we really implemented it in this way, then I fear that it would
>> be difficult for users to find out what flag combinations they can
>> use.
> The guideline I usually follow is that flags depending on another
> flag being set (eg. png needs X) sho
19 matches
Mail list logo
