Lots of people wrote:
> Various good points.
Keep in mind that Gentoo users, even sysadmins, aren't expected to
read -dev. That means that when things like profile changes happen
they have no idea why, or what the impact will be.
That's why we have news. It seems like we put out all of about 3
Ian Stakenvicius posted on Sun, 02 Dec 2012 14:18:04 -0500 as excerpted:
> ... a die in pkg_pretend is "fails to be permitted to emerge", not
> "fails to build". And this would be essentially a p.mask but without it
> using the portage p.mask (and its various connotations).
Exactly. =:^)
--
Michael Orlitzky posted on Sun, 02 Dec 2012 11:02:09 -0500 as excerpted:
> On 12/02/2012 04:40 AM, Duncan wrote:
>>
>> As others have mentioned, equery u[ses] openldap .
>>
>>
> Does nothing in this case.
It gives the global description, which as I said elsewhere, for a flag
that's as critica
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2012-12-02 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
app-editors/XML-XSH 2012-11-26 04:19:46 tove
games-emulation/snes9express2012-11-29 22:18:41 mr_bones_
Additions:
dev-perl/Filesys-SmbC
On 02/12/2012 15:34, Walter Dnes wrote:
> Howsabout following the same protocol as with CXX/NOCXX? In the past,
> portage would pick a default if neither was specified.
You don't know what you're talking about I'm afraid.
Before we had USE defaults (i.e. IUSE="+cxx") we had a nocxx (negative)
On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 11:16:16PM +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote
> Maybe the easiest option would be to keep current defaults and simply
> include a news item when libreoffice starts to pull in openldap
> on a lot of systems remembering admins that they can safely enable
> minimal USE flag for openldap
Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Looks like cman stabilization (that is needed to stabilize newer lvm2,
> that is needed to stabilize newer udev...) is blocked by its init.d
> script wanting to load modules even on kernels without modules:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=442512#c5
>
> Arch team peop
On Sun, 2012-12-02 at 23:10 +0100, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Arch team people think that this should be handled before but... how
> should it be handled?
I agree with the arch teams here. You can do something as mundane as:
if [ -e /proc/modules ]; then
COMPLICATED MODULE MADNESS
fi
Regards,
Tony
El dom, 02-12-2012 a las 11:54 -0500, Michael Orlitzky escribió:
[...]
> The USE=server solution is fine with me; the whole openldap thing was
> really tangential to the point I was trying to make. And for some reason
> it's not as fun to argue in the morning as it is at 2am, so thanks for
> workin
El dom, 02-12-2012 a las 07:58 -0800, Diego Elio Pettenò escribió:
> On 02/12/2012 00:43, Michał Górny wrote:
> > How about splitting the ebuild into separate library and server
> > and fixing the deps? It would be cleaner for people, and we'd just
> > release a news message that those who need an
Hello
Looks like cman stabilization (that is needed to stabilize newer lvm2,
that is needed to stabilize newer udev...) is blocked by its init.d
script wanting to load modules even on kernels without modules:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=442512#c5
Arch team people think that this shoul
On Dec 2, 2012 6:09 PM, "Rich Freeman" wrote:
>
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, hasufell wrote:
> > Only question is now what is a sane soft limit, before you go on and fix
> > stuff.
> > From a discussion in #gentoo-dev we thought 2-4 weeks depending on the
> > severity of the bug is fine. Of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/12/12 03:35 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Dec 2012 02:20:07 + (UTC) Duncan
> <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Rich Freeman posted on Sat, 01 Dec 2012 08:46:34 -0500 as
>> excerpted:
>>
>>> And if we force some types of packages to
Alec Warner wrote:
> Testing all the updates is basically not possible. Understanding
> the updates is basically not possible.
I think it's very possible to understand updates which are important
for the system.
Of course it is a lot of work if it is to be done every day. I would
not update syste
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 01/12/12 11:50 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> $ cat /usr/portage/net-nds/openldap/metadata.xml
>
euse -i 'minimal' |grep openldap
:)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlC7pq8ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBMywEAq
On 12/02/2012 11:19 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 02/12/2012 08:02, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> I think you have Stockholm syndrome. I've updated thousands of packages
>> this month. I cannot do this for each one, and even if I could, there's
>> a huge (unnecessary) opportunity cost to doing so
On 02/12/2012 08:48, Michał Górny wrote:
> And when was poppler split a library/server split?
Okay, listen, I tried to tell you this, before, a number of times:
repeating your same line ad nauseam is _not_ going to convince me that
you're right.
When I'm telling you I don't like your idea, you ca
2012/12/2 Michał Górny :
> And when was poppler split a library/server split?
>
I think it was 2k8 or so, before the kde team took over its maintenance.
On Sun, 02 Dec 2012 08:23:30 -0800
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 02/12/2012 08:20, Michał Górny wrote:
> > For users? Since when a correctly split package is a pain for user?
>
> Funny I think you would have guessed... let's say, a Poppler split that
> every other update would fail in the middl
There are better ways to do this.
For example you can just grep through the configure file, not having
to invoke it, see the xorg-2.elass
Tom
2012/12/2 hasufell :
> already filed a bug, but no response so far
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78
>
> any comments?
>
> This is sane imo
On 11/24/2012 10:12 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> # Pacho Ramos (24 Nov 2012) # Upstream dead and
> no longer runs (#402669). # Removal in a month app-cdr/dvd95
Bug fixed. I just ripped a DVD with dvd95 successfully.
+ 02 Dec 2012; Sebastian Pipping package.mask:
+ Keep dvd95 since bug #402669 is
On 02/12/2012 08:20, Michał Górny wrote:
> For users? Since when a correctly split package is a pain for user?
Funny I think you would have guessed... let's say, a Poppler split that
every other update would fail in the middle leaving a system completely
unable to start a PDF viewer without crashi
On Sun, 02 Dec 2012 07:58:29 -0800
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 02/12/2012 00:43, Michał Górny wrote:
> > How about splitting the ebuild into separate library and server
> > and fixing the deps? It would be cleaner for people, and we'd just
> > release a news message that those who need an LDAP
On 02/12/2012 08:02, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> I think you have Stockholm syndrome. I've updated thousands of packages
> this month. I cannot do this for each one, and even if I could, there's
> a huge (unnecessary) opportunity cost to doing so.
Sorry but there is no way you could have updated tho
On 12/02/2012 04:40 AM, Duncan wrote:
>
> As others have mentioned, equery u[ses] openldap .
>
Does nothing in this case.
> Actually, I have a bug open at this very moment about a new ambiguous USE
> flag, USE=fma, in the new sci-libs/fftw-3.3.3 ebuild. My bdver1 has
> fma4, but not fma3.
On 02/12/2012 00:43, Michał Górny wrote:
> How about splitting the ebuild into separate library and server
> and fixing the deps? It would be cleaner for people, and we'd just
> release a news message that those who need an LDAP server, need to put
> it in their @world.
How about no? Split package
already filed a bug, but no response so far
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78
any comments?
This is sane imo, cause some games herd developers don't agree with the
"always latest EAPI" thing which is no official policy anyway.
--- eclass/games.eclass
+++ eclass/games.eclass
@@ -39,12
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, hasufell wrote:
> Only question is now what is a sane soft limit, before you go on and fix
> stuff.
> From a discussion in #gentoo-dev we thought 2-4 weeks depending on the
> severity of the bug is fine. Ofc this should exclude major changes or
> delicate packages
As I was told in my recruiting process we usually don't just fix up
ebuilds of other devs unless it's trivial, very severe or something.
The usual process is nothing new: try to contact the maintainer, open a
bug, set a deadline when you will go and fix yourself.
Only question is now what is a sa
Duncan schrieb:
> However, hasn't it always been gentoo policy to *STRONGLY* encourage
> users to run emerge --pretend/--ask and EXAMINE THE RESULTS for anything
> unexpected, and resolve it in one way or another to "expected", before
> going ahead?
>
> Thus, anyone suddenly losing their openld
Michał Górny posted on Sun, 02 Dec 2012 09:35:45 +0100 as excerpted:
> On Sun, 2 Dec 2012 02:20:07 + (UTC)
> Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Rich Freeman posted on Sat, 01 Dec 2012 08:46:34 -0500 as excerpted:
>>
>> > And if we force some types of packages to be masked all the time
Michael Orlitzky posted on Sat, 01 Dec 2012 22:44:36 -0500 as excerpted:
> On 12/01/2012 09:48 PM, Duncan wrote:
>> So yes, a news item is reasonable as it's arguably part of that "good
>> documentation". But in general, there's something wrong if we're
>> unduly worrying about loss of functiona
19.11.2012 02:33, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> 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
On Sat, 01 Dec 2012 15:16:49 -0800
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> So Thomáš posted today [1] that the new LibreOffice 4 is going to _need_
> an LDAP provider in the future because they are not going to keep it
> optional as it is now. Right now, the only provider we have in portage
> (as far as me a
On Sun, 2 Dec 2012 02:20:07 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Rich Freeman posted on Sat, 01 Dec 2012 08:46:34 -0500 as excerpted:
>
> > And if we force some types of packages to be masked all the time, then
> > what do we do if we actually need to mask them for removal or securi
35 matches
Mail list logo
