On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 07:37:15PM -0700, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 05:19:10PM +0200, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> >> On 3/26/12 7:20 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 1:08 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
> >
On 03/31/2012 04:25 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:42:50AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote
>> On 03/31/2012 06:34 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>> About the wiki page, I can only document reiserfs+tail usage as it's the
>>> one I use and I know, about other alternatives like using squashfs,
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:42:50AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote
> On 03/31/2012 06:34 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > About the wiki page, I can only document reiserfs+tail usage as it's the
> > one I use and I know, about other alternatives like using squashfs, loop
> > mount... I cannot promise anything as
On 03/31/2012 01:56 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Tiziano Müller wrote:
>> and since "pkg_pretend is run separately from the main phase
>> function sequence, and does not participate in any kind of
>> environment saving" it is not guaranteed to be set to the same $T
>> later
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 03/31/2012 10:52 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300 Alex Alexander
> wrote:
>> @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO
>> it should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable
>> produc
2012/3/31 Tiziano Müller :
> Am Samstag, den 31.03.2012, 14:44 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
>> > On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Maciej Grela wrote:
>>
>> > I've read the PMS and I haven't found information whether this variable
>> > is supposed to be set during pkg_prepare or not.
>>
>> There is no such
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Tiziano Müller wrote:
>> The spec seems to be clear that T is legal in all phases, including
>> pkg_pretend.
> Well, I'd say: there is no sane value you can assign to $T since you
> are not allowed to write anything anyway:
> "pkg_pretend must not write to the filesyst
On 31.03.2012 20:49, Alexander V Vershilov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> It seems that in eclasses we have two differenct environment variables
> with same meaning ESCM and EVCS OFFLINE. Some of eclasses use one and
> some another:
>
> find . -type f | xargs grep -l EVCS_OFFLINE
> ./git-2.eclass
> ./bz
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 22:49:07 +0400
Alexander V Vershilov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> It seems that in eclasses we have two differenct environment variables
> with same meaning ESCM and EVCS OFFLINE. Some of eclasses use one and
> some another:
>
> find . -type f | xargs grep -l EVCS_OFFLINE
> ./git-
Hello.
It seems that in eclasses we have two differenct environment variables
with same meaning ESCM and EVCS OFFLINE. Some of eclasses use one and
some another:
find . -type f | xargs grep -l EVCS_OFFLINE
./git-2.eclass
./bzr.eclass
find . -type f | xargs grep -l ESCM_OFFLINE
./darcs.ecla
On 03/31/2012 06:34 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> About the wiki page, I can only document reiserfs+tail usage as it's the
> one I use and I know, about other alternatives like using squashfs, loop
> mount... I cannot promise anything as I simply don't know how to set
> them.
Squashfs is really simple
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:59:00 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > I wouldn't care if it weren't the fact your gentoo dev posts
> > generally consist of "xyz is stupid, as is the people behind it"
> > whether it be portage, udev, council, etc, take your pick.
>
> No, what I actually say is *why* th
On 30 March 2012 14:25, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Back to year 2009?
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/news/20091004-gentoo-10-years.xml
That never stopped anyone before
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_X-2
On 03/31/2012 04:49 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh posted on Sat, 31 Mar 2012 10:52:53 +0100 as excerpted:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300 Alex Alexander
>> wrote:
>>> @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
>>> should be in stable already. I've been using
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 18:39:21 +0300
Alex Alexander wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2012 5:57 PM, "Ciaran McCreesh"
> wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:08:29 +0300
> > Alex Alexander wrote:
> > > No. I didn't say I think it works, I said I have proof it works.
> >
> > Well that's interesting, because there ar
On 03/31/12 23:38, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 23:30:07 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>> So you think Gentoo should advertise as "the chances of it working
>>> are greater than 0%"?
>>
>> I said better ... not repetitive trolls.
>>
>> If you cared about making things better you'd
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 23:30:07 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > So you think Gentoo should advertise as "the chances of it working
> > are greater than 0%"?
>
> I said better ... not repetitive trolls.
>
> If you cared about making things better you'd spend more time writing
> patches and less time
On Mar 31, 2012 5:57 PM, "Ciaran McCreesh"
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:08:29 +0300
> Alex Alexander wrote:
> > No. I didn't say I think it works, I said I have proof it works.
>
> Well that's interesting, because there are plenty of examples where it
> doesn't work, and all that it takes to
Am Samstag, den 31.03.2012, 14:44 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
> > On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Maciej Grela wrote:
>
> > I've read the PMS and I haven't found information whether this variable
> > is supposed to be set during pkg_prepare or not.
>
> There is no such stage. You mean pkg_pretend, I s
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 23:07:04 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > If you have a ten components, each of which 98% work, your overall
> > system is 80% reliable. If you have twenty such components, it's
> > down to 66% reliable. You're rapidly entering "when it breaks,
> > reinstall" territory here.
> >
On 03/31/12 23:01, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:00:00 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> Good enough is the worst enemy of perfect.
>>
>> While we have s 98% solution that doesn't handle all corner cases you
>> have a theoretical construct in your brain that might in theory cover
>
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:00:00 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> Good enough is the worst enemy of perfect.
>
> While we have s 98% solution that doesn't handle all corner cases you
> have a theoretical construct in your brain that might in theory cover
> 100% of all cases, but it's in your brain where
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 03:06:36 -0700
Brian Harring wrote:
> > The problem with preserved-libs (and emerge --jobs, for that
> > matter) is that the design is "I can think of a few ways where it
> > might break, so I'll hard-code in special cases to handle those,
> > but in general I can't think of wh
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:08:29 +0300
Alex Alexander wrote:
> No. I didn't say I think it works, I said I have proof it works.
Well that's interesting, because there are plenty of examples where it
doesn't work, and all that it takes to disprove a theory is a single
counterexample. So I think you're
El sáb, 31-03-2012 a las 02:35 -0700, Brian Harring escribió:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 08:44:02AM +, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:06:18AM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > > Looks then that there are several alternatives for portage tree, then,
> > > maybe the option would
El sáb, 31-03-2012 a las 08:44 +, Sven Vermeulen escribió:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:06:18AM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Looks then that there are several alternatives for portage tree, then,
> > maybe the option would be to add a note to Gentoo Handbook explaining
> > the cons of having p
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012, Maciej Grela wrote:
> I've read the PMS and I haven't found information whether this variable
> is supposed to be set during pkg_prepare or not.
There is no such stage. You mean pkg_pretend, I suppose?
> Therefore I ask, what is the proper behaviour here ? Is there
> d
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> (or hand me powers to remove people from ML :-)
>
That sounds like a great idea. We could create a code of conduct, and
then designate individuals to enforce it. Maybe we should call them
proctors:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/c
Hi,
recently, I've tried to compile libreoffice using paludis and I've
noticed the following problem:
8< -
kraken ~ # cave resolve libreoffice
Done: 3905 steps
These are the actions I will take, in order:
r app-office/libreoffice:0
On Mar 31, 2012 12:57 PM, "Ciaran McCreesh"
wrote:
>
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300
> Alex Alexander wrote:
> > @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
> > should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable production
> > boxes for years without any issues
Ciaran McCreesh posted on Sat, 31 Mar 2012 10:52:53 +0100 as excerpted:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300 Alex Alexander
> wrote:
>> @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
>> should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable production
>> boxes for years wi
On 03/31/2012 01:06 PM, Brian Harring wrote:
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:52:53AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300
Alex Alexander wrote:
@preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable p
On 03/31/12 17:52, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300
> Alex Alexander wrote:
>> @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
>> should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable production
>> boxes for years without any issues :)
>
> ...and
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:52:53AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300
> Alex Alexander wrote:
> > @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
> > should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable production
> > boxes for years without
On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300
Alex Alexander wrote:
> @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it
> should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable production
> boxes for years without any issues :)
...and here we see the problem. You think that "I haven't n
On Mar 31, 2012 11:00 AM, "Ciaran McCreesh"
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 17:55:27 -0400
> Richard Yao wrote:
> > I think we should wait for Portage 2.2 to be stabilized before we
> > declare Gentoo 2.0. @preserved-libs is enough of an advance that I
> > think claiming 2.0 would be merited, if o
# Masked for removal, use sys-apps/hardened-shadow instead.
# Needs too much special patching to work in Gentoo,
# bugs: #371167, #408647. Removal in 60 days (31 May 2012).
sys-auth/tcb
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 08:44:02AM +, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:06:18AM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > Looks then that there are several alternatives for portage tree, then,
> > maybe the option would be to add a note to Gentoo Handbook explaining
> > the cons of having
On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:59:10 +0200
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> > echo 'import Distribution.Simple; main = defaultMainWithHooks
> > defaultUserHooks' \
> > > $setupdir/Setup.hs
> > }
>
> I think there should be || die after echo, to catch out-of-disk-space
> problems.
Ok :]
> >
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 08:56:22AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Do you really want to be advertising an awful hack that doesn't really
> work, is conceptually unsound and that breaks all kinds of things in
> subtle ways?
Isn't that something all major distributions do? ;-)
Sven
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:06:18AM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Looks then that there are several alternatives for portage tree, then,
> maybe the option would be to add a note to Gentoo Handbook explaining
> the cons of having portage tree on a standard partition and, then, put a
> link to a wiki p
On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 17:55:27 -0400
Richard Yao wrote:
> I think we should wait for Portage 2.2 to be stabilized before we
> declare Gentoo 2.0. @preserved-libs is enough of an advance that I
> think claiming 2.0 would be merited, if only for the attention it
> would draw at Phoronix.
Do you reall
"Walter Dnes" writes:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:26:22PM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote
>
>> Though of course, if anybody has custom stuff in say, /usr/portage/local/
>> which they make by hand, nuking /usr/portage will make you *Very*
>> unpopular.
>
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/han
Walter Dnes posted on Fri, 30 Mar 2012 00:08:08 -0400 as excerpted:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:26:22PM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote
>
>> Though of course, if anybody has custom stuff in say,
>> /usr/portage/local/
>> which they make by hand, nuking /usr/portage will make you *Very*
>> unpopular.
>
44 matches
Mail list logo
