That's probably some topic for gentoo-project ml.
On 19 November 2012 11:00, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:43:44AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> On 18 November 2012 16:41, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> [...]
>> > media-sound/dbmeasure
>> I'll take this one, since it's tangentially related to PulseAudio.
> Speaking of PA, are
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:43:44AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> On 18 November 2012 16:41, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> [...]
> > media-sound/dbmeasure
> I'll take this one, since it's tangentially related to PulseAudio.
Speaking of PA, are you still upstream? If so, can you please merge the
patch I
On 11/18/2012 11:28 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>
> Yes, it was always in /usr/somewhere.
>
> And the pci.ids file came from the pciutils package, not udev.
>
> But note, we are moving that file out of pciutils (and the usb.ids file
> out of usbutils) and they will eventually be generated from the udev
>
On 18 November 2012 16:41, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
[...]
> media-sound/dbmeasure
I'll take this one, since it's tangentially related to PulseAudio.
Cheers,
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME)
On 18/11/2012 20:28, Greg KH wrote:
> But note, we are moving that file out of pciutils (and the usb.ids file
> out of usbutils) and they will eventually be generated from the udev
> package itself, as it holds the master hardware database. But that's a
> totally different topic than the one at ha
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:21:20PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 11:22 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:05:05PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> >> On 11/18/2012 09:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> We develop open source software in public repositories. A developer
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:29:35PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > True, but removing a copyright line doesn't change the real copyright of
> > a file, although it is generally considered something that you really
> > should not do at all (see y
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 07:42:11PM -0800, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 18/11/2012 19:38, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> > Correct me if wrong, but didn't the issue start with udev wanting to put the
> > PCI ID database/file into /usr/share from /etc? Then kmod was changed to
> > link against libs in /us
Gilles Dartiguelongue posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 23:59:44 +0100 as
excerpted:
> Anyway if you read all that up and only mailed about this, I guess you
> found no problem with the rest, right ?
Yes, but I already admitted to bikeshedding the easy stuff, so I'd
honestly not assign too much review
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:05:05PM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 09:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> We develop open source software in public repositories. A developer
> decided it would be helpful to change the software name systemd to
> eudev, among other things, in various files after mis
On 11/18/2012 09:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 07:06:50AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> COPYRIGHT
>>
>> I think this issue is best dealt with on the side - it has no bearing
>> on any of the really contentious points here.
>>
>> I note that the owners of the copyright on udev have
On 18/11/2012 19:38, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> Correct me if wrong, but didn't the issue start with udev wanting to put the
> PCI ID database/file into /usr/share from /etc? Then kmod was changed to
> link against libs in /usr/lib, and then udev made dependent on kmod? I
> think that led to a scenar
On 11/18/2012 10:06 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 08:50:07PM -0500, Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> It's a bizarre development model, I know. :)
>
Works better than Windows' model:
http://moishelettvin.blogspot.com/2006/11/windows-shutdown-crapfest.html
(Okay, old, and I know MS has since
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>
> True, but removing a copyright line doesn't change the real copyright of
> a file, although it is generally considered something that you really
> should not do at all (see your local copyright laws/rules for details.)
Agreed that removing the l
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 08:13:55PM -0500, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 01:51:14AM -0600, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote
> >
> > "... systemd is a cross-distro project: every major and many, many
> > minor distros have had people contributing to systemd. last i heard
> > even two debia
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 08:50:07PM -0500, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:52:22PM -0800, Greg KH wrote
> >
> > Yes, I know all about the firmware issue with media drivers. It's now
> > resolved and fixed, in two different ways (the kernel now loads firmware
> > directly, and on ol
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 07:06:50AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> COPYRIGHT
>
> I think this issue is best dealt with on the side - it has no bearing
> on any of the really contentious points here.
>
> I note that the owners of the copyright on udev have announced to the
> world that (emphasis mine
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:52:22PM -0800, Greg KH wrote
>
> Yes, I know all about the firmware issue with media drivers. It's now
> resolved and fixed, in two different ways (the kernel now loads firmware
> directly, and on older kernels, udev has fixed the issue.) So that's no
> longer an issue
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 01:51:14AM -0600, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote
>
> "... systemd is a cross-distro project: every major and many, many
> minor distros have had people contributing to systemd. last i heard
> even two debian devs have commit access to the repo, among many
> others. systemd ups
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 11:59 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> All I'm asking is some kind of coherent mission statement.
>
> How can we define a mission statement when we are still in the process
> of understanding the codebase, what it does well and wh
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2012-11-18 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
app-crypt/cryptoapi 2012-11-15 18:15:12
pinkbyte
x11-misc/pnmixer2012-11-17 18:
On 11/18/2012 12:37 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
>> wrote:
>>> Yeah, but I think that there's a big difference about any developer
>>> being allowed to create a project unde
On 11/18/2012 11:59 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> All I'm asking is some kind of coherent mission statement.
How can we define a mission statement when we are still in the process
of understanding the codebase, what it does well and what it can do better?
A project announcement should answer yo
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 08:11:49AM -0800, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 18/11/2012 03:11, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > net-libs/libmonetra
> Maybe time to get rid of this one?
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341721
Gone.
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastru
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Gilles Dartiguelongue posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 20:06:30 +0100 as
> excerpted:
>
> It's admittedly a style thing thus pretty much up to the author, purely
> bikeshedding in the original sense of the essay's trivial color choi
Le dimanche 18 novembre 2012 à 20:45 +, Duncan a écrit :
> Gilles Dartiguelongue posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 20:06:30 +0100 as
> excerpted:
>
[...]
> But as I said up top, that's (mostly, the pattern matching vs string
> matching will occasionally bite if you're not on the lookout for it)
> tri
app-misc/dailystrips
app-misc/gramps
dev-php/PEAR-PEAR
dev-php/pear
games-misc/fortune-mod-mormon
games-misc/fortune-mod-scriptures
media-libs/libbluray
media-tv/ivtv-utils
media-tv/ivtv
media-video/mplayer-resume
sys-fs/mhddfs
x11-themes/gdm-themes
Some of them are co-maintained but, if you want
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
>> Hmm, pretty cool! Then I can create a stupid project, put it on gentoo
>> infra and claim it as being Gentoo sponsored. Good to know, thanks!
>>
>
> Just to make it clear
On 11/18/2012 2:39 PM, Duncan wrote:
> Peter Stuge posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 19:00:59 +0100 as excerpted:
>
>> Forget about the loader. Your knob is in a different configuration,
>> specifically CONFIG_MODULES=n in the kernel.
>
> Just to note now that the specific topic has come up, yes, I am a
Gilles Dartiguelongue posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 20:06:30 +0100 as
excerpted:
It's admittedly a style thing thus pretty much up to the author, purely
bikeshedding in the original sense of the essay's trivial color choice,
but...
> # Even though xz-utils are in @system, they must still be added to
Peter Stuge posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 19:00:59 +0100 as excerpted:
> Forget about the loader. Your knob is in a different configuration,
> specifically CONFIG_MODULES=n in the kernel.
Just to note now that the specific topic has come up, yes, I am aware of
and have that kernel option set to dis
Hi list,
gstreamer-1 has been around for some time now and it is needed for gnome
3.6 to enter the tree. Since gstreamer devs have been a bit busy irl, a
few guys from gnome herd decided to take a look at it and try to bump
everything. I had an itch to scratch wrt current eclass writing so I
decid
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
>> wrote:
>>> Yeah, but I think that there's a big difference about any developer
>>> being allowed to create a pr
Rich Freeman wrote:
> > I think that there's a big difference about any developer
> > being allowed to create a project under the gentoo umbrella and
> > create a project and claim it as Gentoo sponsored without any
> > review of the council. I agree that it can exists in the Github
> > account, or
On Sun, 2012-11-18 at 17:19 +, Duncan wrote:
> Diego Elio Pettenò posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:47:22 -0800 as excerpted:
>
> > On 18/11/2012 07:43, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> >> And, by the way, I doubt, that people "laugh" about eudev (previously
> >> named udev-ng) creation. Mostly
Le dimanche 18 novembre 2012 à 11:11 +, Robin H. Johnson a écrit :
> net-nds/nsscache
> sys-auth/nss_ldap
If nobody else want them and I don't forget about them, I'll take care
of these.
--
Gilles Dartiguelongue
Gentoo
Duncan wrote:
> kmod itself is trivial in size time and space requirements, but it's
> the principle as much as anything, and in the case of an unneeded
> module loader there's an additional security concern as well
I'm afraid this is flawed. If you want to hinder modules from being
loaded then yo
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> So here is the question I'll pose. Is it worth all of that extra
> work for us to support separate /usr correctly, or should we just tell
> everyone to start using initramfs or, if they don't want to use
> initramfs and they are just using p
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
> wrote:
>> Yeah, but I think that there's a big difference about any developer
>> being allowed to create a project under the gentoo umbrella and create
>> a project and claim it as
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
wrote:
> Yeah, but I think that there's a big difference about any developer
> being allowed to create a project under the gentoo umbrella and create
> a project and claim it as Gentoo sponsored without any review of the
> council. I agree
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:48:33AM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El dom, 18-11-2012 a las 11:13 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> > On 18/11/12 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:00:52AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> > >> Having a builtin is a good idea, but the implementation as a
Diego Elio Pettenò posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:47:22 -0800 as excerpted:
> On 18/11/2012 07:43, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>> And, by the way, I doubt, that people "laugh" about eudev (previously
>> named udev-ng) creation. Mostly they just can't understand why gentoo
>> devs created third
Hey guys,
Just read through this entire thread, and one concern still rings loud
and clear -- what is the purpose of this fork?
The various responses I've read so far are something like:
- Because Linus yelled a lot when udev/Kay broke firmware loading.
Except both Linus and the udev people fix
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
> wrote:
>> If these organizations aren't governed by Gentoo they should have some
>> disclaimers, saying that the projects hosted there aren't sponsored by
>> Gentoo, but this udev-n
Rich Freeman posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:26:17 -0500 as excerpted:
> I'm sure all of the options will be offered as options for as long as
> people care to take care of them. With the number of anti-systemd posts
> on -dev I don't see openrc going away anytime soon.
>
> I'm sure the default wi
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Rafael Goncalves Martins
wrote:
> If these organizations aren't governed by Gentoo they should have some
> disclaimers, saying that the projects hosted there aren't sponsored by
> Gentoo, but this udev-ng/eudev/whatever thing does the opposite and
> actually adver
El 18/11/12 04:39, Greg KH escribió:
> Anyway, I now see a _very_ dangerous commit in the "Copyright" branch
> that better not get merged into the tree, as it's wrong, and illegal
> under all countries that follow the "normal" body of Copyright Law. It
> should be removed right now before someone
It depends on who is actually laughing I'd say.
just my 0.01c.
--
Fabio Erculiani
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
> On 18.11.2012 08:57, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02:19PM -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
>>> 1) systemd-udev will require systemd. Stated by the systemd
>>> maintainers themselves as a thing they want to do in the future. Some
>>
On 18/11/2012 03:11, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> net-libs/libmonetra
Maybe time to get rid of this one?
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=341721
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
On 18/11/2012 07:54, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> It's your choice to participate on those social platforms. Please don't
> make it our problem. It doesn't add anything useful to this discussion.
It adds. Because, while I don't know about you, I rely on Gentoo on my
job. And many others do, too.
And
On 11/18/2012 04:47 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> But yes, many more can't understand that... and neither do I.
Then would be nice if everybody shuts up, let people play with their
toys and if something useful happens evaluate the result.
According to the people that asked me to help the whole
On 18-11-2012 07:47:22 -0800, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 18/11/2012 07:43, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> > And, by the way, I doubt, that people "laugh" about eudev (previously
> > named udev-ng) creation. Mostly they just can't understand why gentoo
> > devs created third udev's fork, whe
On 18-11-2012 07:42:40 -0800, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Also, I doubt anybody would argue that it's not commutative (move to
> /usr, move to /) — it's just pragmatic, most stuff uses /usr anyway as
> base, so the move / -> /usr is infinitely less painful than /usr -> /.
You end up with a symlink
On 11/18/2012 04:34 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> To be honest, in my opinion, «killing of separate /usr» can reasonable
> be continued by moving all it's content to / (/usr/bin -> /bin, /usr/lib
> -> lib, and so on) in despite of all objections, as it was invented just
> because of disk s
On 18/11/2012 07:43, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> And, by the way, I doubt, that people "laugh" about eudev (previously
> named udev-ng) creation. Mostly they just can't understand why gentoo
> devs created third udev's fork, where it was already done (and
> maintained) fork for LFS (somewher
> The fact you're asking means you really haven't been following anything
> I've been doing lately.
Nope ;) I knew that, but as far as I read some of your emails, it was
thoughts that you protect udev+sysD integration and followed udev's
functionality downgrade.
> So your whole rant picking up o
On 18/11/2012 07:34, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
> To be honest, in my opinion, «killing of separate /usr» can reasonable
> be continued by moving all it's content to / (/usr/bin -> /bin, /usr/lib
> -> lib, and so on) in despite of all objections, as it was invented just
> because of disk spac
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 12:14:48 +0100 as
excerpted:
> Matt Turner schrieb:
>>> Then udev switched to kmod as a build-time dep. I could no longer
>>> package.provide kmod as I had module-init-tools, because it was
>>> required to /build/ udev. For no valid reason
On 18/11/2012 07:16, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>
> I'm still happy enough with building udev out from systemd tree and
> letting sep. /usr consept from 90s to finally die in favour of
> simplifying the system.
> The BIOSes have been upgraded last century to support booting from
> larger partitions
To be honest, in my opinion, «killing of separate /usr» can reasonable
be continued by moving all it's content to / (/usr/bin -> /bin, /usr/lib
-> lib, and so on) in despite of all objections, as it was invented just
because of disk space exhaustion.
18.11.2012 22:16, Samuli Suominen пишет:
> On
On 18-11-2012 17:16:18 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Nobody has ever provided a valid reason for using sep. /usr in the ML
> either.
No need for a reason.
It is a fact that it is in use *right now*.
(Existing systems/installs that are not to be phased out anywhere near
soon.)
Fabian
--
Fab
On 18/11/12 17:04, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 18/11/2012 03:11, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
[Just asking because all you angry answers to some devs make me think
that you're on SysD side, when tons of Gentoo users and Gentoo devs are
on "non-SysD-related udev" side.]
The fact you're as
On 18/11/2012 03:11, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>
> [Just asking because all you angry answers to some devs make me think
> that you're on SysD side, when tons of Gentoo users and Gentoo devs are
> on "non-SysD-related udev" side.]
The fact you're asking means you really haven't been follow
On 18/11/12 16:11, hasufell wrote:
On 11/18/2012 03:08 PM, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM, justin wrote:
On 16/11/12 09:48, Samuli Suominen wrote:
does this mean it puts the binary-only package, nvidia-cg-toolkit, to
the default search path when you call the linker
On 11/18/2012 03:08 PM, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM, justin wrote:
>> On 16/11/12 09:48, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>>> does this mean it puts the binary-only package, nvidia-cg-toolkit, to
>>> the default search path when you call the linker (compiler)?
>>>
>>> please
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM, justin wrote:
> On 16/11/12 09:48, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> does this mean it puts the binary-only package, nvidia-cg-toolkit, to
>> the default search path when you call the linker (compiler)?
>>
>> please don't do that, it is counterproductive with the purpose
On 18.11.2012 08:57, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:02:19PM -0800, Alec Warner wrote:
>> 1) systemd-udev will require systemd. Stated by the systemd
>> maintainers themselves as a thing they want to do in the future. Some
>> users don't want to use systemd. We could go into detail as t
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
wrote:
> So, I really hope, that Gentoo will not obey RedHat's will and will not
> force SystemD as default init system, and not drop pretty OpenRC to
> trash. And I hope, that ryao's eudev will be most used (if not default)
> variant of
Wow, that's some kind of thread you started... :) I'll respond in
general to a bunch of stuff on this list by topic.
COUNCIL MEETING
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>
> So, that's a nice summary, but, what is the end result here?
>
Speaking as somebody who was there, but not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18.11.2012 06:00, Richard Yao wrote:
> but we are doing AGILE development, so long term goals have not
> been well defined.
[...]
> With that said, Linux distributions are victims of people
> continually trying to reinvent the wheel with no formal p
app-admin/longrun
app-laptop/fnfx
app-laptop/hdapsd
app-laptop/ibam
app-laptop/laptop-mode-tools
app-laptop/radeontool
app-laptop/spicctrl
app-laptop/tp_smapi
app-laptop/tpb
app-misc/gpsdrive
app-mobilephone/obex-data-server
media-libs/sbc
net-misc/xsupplicant
net-wireless/acx-firmware
net-wireless
El lun, 29-10-2012 a las 12:16 +, Markos Chandras escribió:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Samuli Suominen
> wrote:
> > On 28/10/12 14:26, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> I would like to know about mobile team status and also show that this
> >> team has important bugs assig
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> apache team is currently composed by nelchael (that is inactive since
> May 2012) and trapni (that is not taking care of that packages)
>
> If you are interested please join. If it's still inactive in next week,
> I will assign apache bugs to
Matt Turner schrieb:
>> Then udev switched to kmod as a build-time dep. I could no longer
>> package.provide kmod as I had module-init-tools, because it was required
>> to /build/ udev. For no valid reason on my system. Like any unnecessary
>> feature that can be used to load an exploit, it's wo
Over the years, I've come to be the maintainer a huge number of
packages (~300 or so, and I just gave up ~100 of those back to relevant
herds). Many of them are from inheriting packages when other developers
have retired - the upstream may also be dead, but there is nothing that
supersedes the func
By the way, Diego, what is you current point of view on Gentoo default
init system?
i.e., what do you personally prefer to see as default init here: SystemD
or OpenRC?
[Just asking because all you angry answers to some devs make me think
that you're on SysD side, when tons of Gentoo users and Gen
On 11/18/2012 04:48 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El dom, 18-11-2012 a las 11:13 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
On 18/11/12 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:00:52AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
Having a builtin is a good idea, but the implementation as a mandatory
dependency on kmod is
As Trapni is not taking care of them at all, we (retirement team)
decided to drop him from their maintainership to reflect reality and
give others the opportunity to know they need a maintainer and get them
if possible:
media-sound/teamspeak-server-bin -> assigned not to proxy-maint as looks
some u
# Robin H. Johnson (18 Nov 2012)
# Dead upstream, replaced by gitolite
dev-vcs/gitosis
dev-vcs/gitosis-gentoo
--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
apache team is currently composed by nelchael (that is inactive since
May 2012) and trapni (that is not taking care of that packages)
If you are interested please join. If it's still inactive in next week,
I will assign apache bugs to maintainer-needed (I am still unsure about
if, in that case, ap
El dom, 18-11-2012 a las 11:13 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 18/11/12 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:00:52AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> >> Having a builtin is a good idea, but the implementation as a mandatory
> >> dependency on kmod is not. The plan is to reintroduce
As talked with Dagger via mail, feel free to get it
Thanks
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> I understand the bizarre need of some people to want to build the udev
> binary without the build-time dependencies that systemd requires, but
> surely that is a set of simple Makefile patches, right? And is
> something that small really worth ri
On 18/11/12 07:19, Greg KH wrote:
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:00:52AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
Having a builtin is a good idea, but the implementation as a mandatory
dependency on kmod is not. The plan is to reintroduce it as an optional
dependency, so that distributions (and Gentoo users) that
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Richard Yao posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 00:35:22 -0500 as excerpted:
>
Having a builtin is a good idea, but the implementation as a mandatory
dependency on kmod is not. The plan is to reintroduce it as an
optiona
On 18/11/12 10:21, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 18/11/2012 00:08, Greg KH wrote:
But if this fork is now the "official Gentoo fork", owned by the Gentoo
Foundation, and it's the way forward that Gentoo the distro is going to
take with regards to how the boot process works on the system, then I
h
El dom, 18-11-2012 a las 00:27 -0800, Greg KH escribió:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:19:21AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 03:10:08AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> > > You are the one claiming that this is our official fork. None of us are.
> >
> > It's on the Gentoo github site,
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 12:19:21AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 03:10:08AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> > You are the one claiming that this is our official fork. None of us are.
>
> It's on the Gentoo github site, and it has the Gentoo Foundation
> copyright all over all of the
On 11/18/2012 03:19 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 03:10:08AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>> You are the one claiming that this is our official fork. None of us are.
>
> It's on the Gentoo github site, and it has the Gentoo Foundation
> copyright all over all of the files in one of the
On 18/11/2012 00:08, Greg KH wrote:
> But if this fork is now the "official Gentoo fork", owned by the Gentoo
> Foundation, and it's the way forward that Gentoo the distro is going to
> take with regards to how the boot process works on the system, then I
> have something to say about it, as it aff
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 03:10:08AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> You are the one claiming that this is our official fork. None of us are.
It's on the Gentoo github site, and it has the Gentoo Foundation
copyright all over all of the files in one of the branches, reviewed by
you.
I think I would be
On 11/18/2012 03:08 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 02:54:38AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
>> On 05/09/2012 06:36 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 08:51:37PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
I foresee a new udev fork then.
>>>
>>> Please feel free to do so, the code has b
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 02:54:38AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 05/09/2012 06:36 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 08:51:37PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> >> I foresee a new udev fork then.
> >
> > Please feel free to do so, the code has been open since the first day I
> > create
Richard Yao posted on Sun, 18 Nov 2012 00:35:22 -0500 as excerpted:
>>> Having a builtin is a good idea, but the implementation as a mandatory
>>> dependency on kmod is not. The plan is to reintroduce it as an
>>> optional dependency, so that distributions (and Gentoo users) that do
>>> not want i
96 matches
Mail list logo
