Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files

2011-11-03 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 11:59:55 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Andreas K Huettel wrote: > > On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 10:16:53 Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > >> As we do have the "$delay before breaking old" period, usually with > >> $delay="1 year": Should we also a

Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog in eclass dir (was: Old changelogs / eclass dir)

2011-11-03 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
> > 1) Why is there no ChangeLog in the eclass directory? > > In my personal opinion this is missing there, if only for historical > > reasons... Should we still start one? > > as there was only positive feedback to this suggestion, I'll create a > ChangeLog file in the eclass directory during th

Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest signing

2011-11-03 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 10:55:52PM +0100, enno+gen...@groeper-berlin.de wrote: > >> If it is (also) for the users, why is there no code for it in portage > >> anymore [3]? > > Hmm, I hadn't see that removal, but it makes sense unless the entire > > tree is developer-signed, which isn't likely to ha

Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest signing

2011-11-03 Thread enno+gentoo
Hi, Am 02.11.2011 17:11, schrieb Robin H. Johnson: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 01:03:21PM +0100, enno+gen...@groeper-berlin.de wrote: >> I followed the threads about manifest signing with interest and even had >> a look at the manifest signing guide [4]. Sounds nice at first view. >> But, please cor

Re: [gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

2011-11-03 Thread Mike Frysinger
http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/user.eclass?r1=1.8&r2=1.9 -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-dev] recovering from corrupted vdb

2011-11-03 Thread Zac Medico
On 11/03/2011 04:15 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > Shouldn't portage offer some means to recover from a corrupted vdb? > > I just stumbled upon > > and it seems really bad. > > It would suck if the on

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files (was: Old changelogs / eclass dir)

2011-11-03 Thread James Broadhead
On Nov 3, 2011 10:25 a.m., "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 09:09:19 Michał Górny wrote: > > > > Maybe we should keep old changelogs in a separate directory to decrease > > ebuilddir pollution? > > Not sure about that. Thank you for this infusion of practicality. Ho

Re: [gentoo-dev] recovering from corrupted vdb

2011-11-03 Thread Rich Freeman
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:15 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > I think we can't salvage much from a corrupted db (anything can happen, > and the reporter mentions some code being present in the files), but at > least "emerge -e world" or equivalent should be possible. I'm not sure how portage handl

[gentoo-dev] recovering from corrupted vdb

2011-11-03 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
Shouldn't portage offer some means to recover from a corrupted vdb? I just stumbled upon and it seems really bad. It would suck if the only solution to this is reinstall (I remember package database bec

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files

2011-11-03 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Andreas K Huettel wrote: > On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 10:16:53 Michael Haubenwallner wrote: >> As we do have the "$delay before breaking old" period, usually with >> $delay="1 year": Should we also apply this $delay to the output of >> above command? > Makes all per

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files (was: Old changelogs / eclass dir)

2011-11-03 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 09:09:19 Michał Górny wrote: > > Maybe we should keep old changelogs in a separate directory to decrease > ebuilddir pollution? Not sure about that. > > > The new ChangeLog file will be identical to the current ChangeLog > > file except for being truncated at 1/1/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files

2011-11-03 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 10:16:53 Michael Haubenwallner wrote: > > Again for 'emerge --changelog': > > As we do have the "$delay before breaking old" period, usually with > $delay="1 year": Should we also apply this $delay to the output of above > command? > > If yes, what I can think of AT

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files

2011-11-03 Thread Andreas K. Huettel
On Donnerstag 03 November 2011 09:24:07 Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Andreas K Huettel wrote: > > The "old entries" file ChangeLog-2010 will be identical to the > > current ChangeLog file except for skipping at the start all entries > > added later than 31/12/2010. > > Just to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files

2011-11-03 Thread Michael Haubenwallner
On 11/03/2011 01:33 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > In a week's time I personally, manually, will "rotate" all ChangeLog files > larger than 100k in the tree, by splitting them at 31/12/2010-1/1/2011. > Opinions, flames, ...? Again for 'emerge --changelog': As we do have the "$delay before b

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files

2011-11-03 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2011, Andreas K Huettel wrote: > The "old entries" file ChangeLog-2010 will be identical to the > current ChangeLog file except for skipping at the start all entries > added later than 31/12/2010. Just to make sure that I understand it: Does this imply that the old entries fil

Re: [gentoo-dev] Rotating oversized ChangeLog files (was: Old changelogs / eclass dir)

2011-11-03 Thread Michał Górny
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 01:33:38 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Dear all, > > > 2) I'd like to suggest that for changelogs that grow beyond a > > certain size (e.g. profiles/ChangeLog) the file is "rotated" > > similar to /var/log logfiles. I.e. the current file is renamed with > > a date extens