On 25 July 2012 02:52, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> While I completely understand where Fabian is coming from on all this I
> respectfully disagree. Long term gentoo users do NOT read the handbook,
> ever. I still install new systems with odd hacks that I picked up when
> gentoo was version
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:42:31AM +0200, Ralph Sennhauser wrote
> man 5 portage about files in /etc/portage
>
> make.conf
> The global custom settings for Portage. See make.conf(5). If
> present, this file will over??? ride settings from /etc/make.conf.
>
>
> > 3. This news item is
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 04:32:00PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > On 24/07/12 02:52 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> >> On 07/24/2012 09:33 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> >>> On
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 24/07/12 02:52 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> On 07/24/2012 09:33 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>> On 24-07-2012 09:24:03 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
I guess this is a matte
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 03:33:03PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> The difference is that news only communicates what is "news." Unless
> the manual contains a revision history it contains everything you
> already know, perhaps with a gem buried in there somewhere.
>
> This is the same reason why wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 24/07/12 02:52 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> On 07/24/2012 09:33 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 24-07-2012 09:24:03 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> I guess this is a matter of opinion, but on Gentoo I don't
>>> think we're really at much r
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Dale wrote:
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>> On 24-07-2012 14:52:43 -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
This is a change that will break all new installs and expecting
experienced gentoo users to read
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 24-07-2012 14:52:43 -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>>> This is a change that will break all new installs and expecting
>>> experienced gentoo users to read the handbook is simply a fantasy.
>> I don't see ho
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> I don't know about general consensus. In my opinion, it's plain spam to
>> existing users. (And that would IMO be the xth news item in a row to be
>> spam.)
> Can't say I agree here. Some news items have been more u
On 07/24/12 14:52, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>
> This is a big enough change that it will throw users who do not know,
> and my first impression of /etc/make.conf et all missing on a new stage
> is "file a bug report for a broken stage and assign it to those morons
> in releng". (please not
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 24-07-2012 14:52:43 -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> This is a change that will break all new installs and expecting
>> experienced gentoo users to read the handbook is simply a fantasy.
>
> I don't see how it breaks. And second
On 24-07-2012 14:52:43 -0400, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> This is a change that will break all new installs and expecting
> experienced gentoo users to read the handbook is simply a fantasy.
I don't see how it breaks. And secondly, if you do refuse to read the
manual, why don't you refuse t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/24/2012 09:33 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 24-07-2012 09:24:03 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> I guess this is a matter of opinion, but on Gentoo I don't think we're
>> really at much risk of driving people away by OVER-communicating. Our
>> use
On 24-07-2012 13:15:43 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> I think a news item is reasonable here (in addition to the above).
[snip good arguments]
But that's a news item on (a version of) Portage, not on catalyst and
stage3 building.
--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
signature.asc
On 07/24/12 09:21, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> Given that this just affects new installs, is a news item (via
> portage) a particularly good way to inform everyone? I was wondering
> if it'd make more sense to notify on the website and *definitely*
> change the Handbook...
>
> ..and maybe includ
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 24-07-2012 08:01:40 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> 3) That news item about udev-181 and a unified /usr is still greeting
>>> new users...and it's still claiming an unmask of 2012-03-
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I'll agree that something needs to be done to clean up past news items
> that are obsolete. Can we go back and make them expire or just delete
> them? Yesterday's news isn't news.
They can simply be removed from the repository. eselect news can
h
On 24-07-2012 09:33:39 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 24/07/12 07:39 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>
> > From a different angle, perhaps stage3s shouldn't include a
> > default /etc/make.conf at all. Would solve this issue nicely, and
> > doesn't require a news item at all, IMO.
> >
>
> Would
On 24-07-2012 09:24:03 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I guess this is a matter of opinion, but on Gentoo I don't think we're
> really at much risk of driving people away by OVER-communicating. Our
> users are used to things changing and a certain level of
> fix-it-yourself, but if we know something
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 24/07/12 07:39 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> From a different angle, perhaps stage3s shouldn't include a
> default /etc/make.conf at all. Would solve this issue nicely, and
> doesn't require a news item at all, IMO.
>
Would that work? We still
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 24-07-2012 08:01:40 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
>> 3) That news item about udev-181 and a unified /usr is still greeting
>> new users...and it's still claiming an unmask of 2012-03-19, which is
>> three months ago. It's quite confusing in t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 23/07/12 09:58 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> On 24-07-2012 01:33, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone
>>>
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto posted on Tue, 24 Jul 2012 10:54:25 + as
excerpted:
> Starting with catalyst 2.0.10, make.conf and make.profile will be moved
> from /etc to /etc/portage.
As with other app-focused news items, if it were a catalyst-user-focused
change, you'd set the filter accordin
On 24-07-2012 20:13:46 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote:
> Apologies for butting in as a user:
>
> As a user of Gentoo from about 2002 or so, with multiple gentoo systems,
> this thread is the first I have heard of make.conf moving ... cant
> imagine I am the only one! and are you about to break ou
On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 07:20 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > I don't know about general consensus. In my opinion, it's plain spam to
> > existing users. (And that would IMO be the xth news item in a row to be
> > spam.)
>
> Can't say I agre
On 24-07-2012 08:01:40 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> As a user who's done a lot of reinstalling this year, I can offer a
> couple observations:
>
> 1) The handbook contains a barebones make.conf, just as it comes with
> a number of other barebones configuration files. You probably don't
> need to su
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 24-07-2012 07:20:31 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> > I don't know about general consensus. In my opinion, it's plain spam to
>> > existing users. (And that would IMO be the xth n
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
wrote:
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40 Jul 20 00:26 /etc/make.globals ->
>> ../usr/share/portage/config/make.globals
>
> This symlink is installed by Portage, so it's outside catalyst control.
Bug filed: https://bugs.gentoo.org/427862
--
On 24-07-2012 07:20:31 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > I don't know about general consensus. In my opinion, it's plain spam to
> > existing users. (And that would IMO be the xth news item in a row to be
> > spam.)
>
> Can't say I agree her
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> I don't know about general consensus. In my opinion, it's plain spam to
> existing users. (And that would IMO be the xth news item in a row to be
> spam.)
Can't say I agree here. Some news items have been more useful than
others, but I d
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> Well, at least this discrepancy is documented (portage(5)):
> “[/etc/portage/]make.conf: […] If present, this file will override
> settings from /etc/make.conf.”
> “If both /etc/make.profile/ and /etc/portage/make.profile/ exist, then
> /etc/make
On 24-07-2012 10:59:08 +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> > I still don't see why you'd bother all existing users with that
> > info. Just blog, or (better) write a nice email to -announce, and
> > update the install docs.
>
> The point of "bugging" all users was to minimize the risk of a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 09:29, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> wrote:
>> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone
>> have any comments about it?
>
> Several comments:
>
> 1. Maybe no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 06:54, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 23-07-2012 22:10:08 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
>> wrote:
>>> This is just a heads-up for Gentoo users that got used to find
>>> make.conf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 08:48, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:07:59AM +, Jorge Manuel B. S.
> Vicetto wrote:
>> I've talked with both the PR and Docs team before about this
>> change. I'll try to help the docs team updating the handbook.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 00:07, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone
> have any comments about it? The idea is to show this news item on
> all Gentoo systems. Is that even possible / desirable
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Does it? With make.profile it seems to be the other way around, i.e.
> /etc takes precedence over /etc/portage.
Well, at least this discrepancy is documented (portage(5)):
“[/etc/portage/]make.conf: […] If present, this file will override
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> wrote:
>> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone have
>> any comments about it?
> Several comments:
> 1. Maybe note that /etc/portage/make.conf takes preceden
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> make.conf
> The global custom settings for Portage. See make.conf(5). If
> present, this file will over‐ ride settings from /etc/make.conf.
Thanks — missed it somehow.
> We aren't discussing dropping support for the old loca
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:29:14 +0300
Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> wrote:
> > I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone have
> > any comments about it?
>
> Several comments:
>
> 1. Maybe note that /etc/portage/make.co
On 24 July 2012 08:07, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
wrote:
Title: Changes on new stages
Author: Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2012-07-27
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Starting with catalyst 2.0.10, make.conf and make.profile will be
moved from /etc to /etc/postf
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
wrote:
> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone have
> any comments about it?
Several comments:
1. Maybe note that /etc/portage/make.conf takes precedence over /etc/make.conf?
2. New make.conf location (although
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 08:48:52 +
Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> Can current users also already use the /etc/portage location? If so,
> I can already update the docs now (since I'll need to describe both
> of the locations for a while anyhow).
I moved my make.conf to the new location about a year ago.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:07:59AM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> I've talked with both the PR and Docs team before about this change.
> I'll try to help the docs team updating the handbook.
Speaking of which, will this also start the use of the SHA512 & WHIRLPOOL
checksums? We've had
El lun, 23-07-2012 a las 15:08 -0700, Diego Elio Pettenò escribió:
> Il 23/07/2012 14:10, Peter Stuge ha scritto:
> > Did anyone report it upstream?
>
> Not me ... because I wouldn't know which one to care about. The problem
> with upstream is that you have what they call master that is not really
45 matches
Mail list logo
