On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 01:38:03PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > In my mind, the message says "either remove 70-* and setup 80-*" or your
> > system will end up broken.
>
> The other bit is that modifying symlinks in /etc/init.d is only
>
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Philip Webb wrote:
> I've never seen this before in 10 years using Gentoo.
> Has anyone verified that Splice's licence is compatible with Gentoo ?
What do you mean by "compatible with Gentoo?"
Gentoo is not a party to the distribution or use of splice, so why
w
On 03/29/2013 09:26 PM, Philip Webb wrote:
> I noticed a couple of games which have been added to the tree
> & thought it worth giving them a try. One of them resulted in this :
>
> root:512 ~> emerge -pv games-puzzle/splice
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
> Cal
I noticed a couple of games which have been added to the tree
& thought it worth giving them a try. One of them resulted in this :
root:512 ~> emerge -pv games-puzzle/splice
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild N F ] gam
On 29/03/2013 20:20, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> Might I recommend at least a little bit of context before going right
> into "you have to remove these rules"? IE - if a user wants to keep
> the old mac-based rules they already have, can't they? 80-*.rules
> doesn't override that now, does it?
It
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I don't have enough time to go through the rest of this thread, but if
the first sentence hasn't been adjusted yet:
On 29/03/13 08:20 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> If you still have network interface renaming rules in
> /etc/udev/rules.d, like 70-per
On 2013-03-29, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 29/03/13 18:21, Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg) wrote:
>> On 2013-03-29, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>>> On 29/03/2013 12:34, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
>> If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how
Am Freitag, 29. März 2013, 17:57:34 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
[snip]
> /dev/null
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
On 29/03/13 18:21, Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg) wrote:
On 2013-03-29, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 29/03/2013 12:34, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how many kernel
changes happen, it'll always be eth0.
That
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:54:52 +0100
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 28. März 2013, 19:15:59 schrieb Michał Górny:
> > Hello,
> >
> > As discussed with ulm, I'd like to start a thread for collecting
> > initial items for EAPI 6. Preferably items which are either almost
> > ready or are
Am Donnerstag, 28. März 2013, 19:15:59 schrieb Michał Górny:
> Hello,
>
> As discussed with ulm, I'd like to start a thread for collecting
> initial items for EAPI 6. Preferably items which are either almost
> ready or are easy to implement and are non-controversial. In other
> words, thing which a
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> In my mind, the message says "either remove 70-* and setup 80-*" or your
> system will end up broken.
The other bit is that modifying symlinks in /etc/init.d is only
mentioned in passing. That is a VERY important step unless your new
nam
Le vendredi 29 mars 2013 à 08:30 +0200, Samuli Suominen a écrit :
> This is from Fedora Devel Mailing List. I found it to be news worthy
> also for Gentoo maintainers.
Thanks for the heads up, it will probably save some time figuring out
magic/sudden break up :)
On 29 March 2013 16:21, Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg) wrote:
> On 2013-03-29, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > On 29/03/2013 12:34, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> >> Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
> >>> > If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how many
> kernel
> >>> > changes happe
On 2013-03-29, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> On 29/03/2013 12:34, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
>> Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
>>> > If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how many kernel
>>> > changes happen, it'll always be eth0.
>> That was not true with the old persistent
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Those 70-* and 80-* are in udev pkg_postinst, this news item, everywhere...
> can all 3 be deleted if you haven't modified them yourself.
>
> So that leaves one... local.rules... dunno about that. I'm curious.
Excellent, sounds good then
On 29/03/13 16:35, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
What do you have there? We cover bunch of those in pkg_postinst of udev
already.
After a bunch of cleanup (after which I have yet to detect any
problems), I have:
70-persistent-cd.rules 70-persiste
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> What do you have there? We cover bunch of those in pkg_postinst of udev
> already.
After a bunch of cleanup (after which I have yet to detect any
problems), I have:
70-persistent-cd.rules 70-persistent-net.rules
80-net-name-slot.rules ki
On 29/03/13 15:30, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
wrote:
Not really. Every time I modified anything in there, it just took a few udev
versions and suddenly I was flooded with deprecation warnings a la "things
work different now, find out on your own how
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
wrote:
> Not really. Every time I modified anything in there, it just took a few udev
> versions and suddenly I was flooded with deprecation warnings a la "things
> work different now, find out on your own how to fix it..."
Not to mention at lea
Am Freitag, 29. März 2013, 13:20:20 schrieb Samuli Suominen:
> On 29/03/13 13:38, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > On 29/03/2013 12:29, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> >> One you can control, the another you can't. So still not FUD.
> >
> > You do not really control it any more than the kernel. The fact tha
On 03/29/2013 08:20 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 29/03/13 13:38, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> On 29/03/2013 12:29, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>> One you can control, the another you can't. So still not FUD.
>>
>> You do not really control it any more than the kernel. The fact that me
>> and you can
On 29/03/2013 13:20, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> I don't agree with that, /etc/udev/rules.d and overriding udev rules is
> very basic administration, very basic...
> I'll put a bit more trust on our users.
Let's agree to disagree then. To me, it's much more consistent the
kernel's behaviour than thes
On 29/03/13 13:38, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 29/03/2013 12:29, Samuli Suominen wrote:
One you can control, the another you can't. So still not FUD.
You do not really control it any more than the kernel. The fact that me
and you can edit an udev ruleset to "control" it, does not mean that
mo
On 29/03/2013 12:34, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
>> > If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how many kernel
>> > changes happen, it'll always be eth0.
> That was not true with the old persistent naming. One example which we
> encountered in #
On 29/03/2013 12:29, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> One you can control, the another you can't. So still not FUD.
You do not really control it any more than the kernel. The fact that me
and you can edit an udev ruleset to "control" it, does not mean that
most users see it as a black box.
The news item
Diego Elio Pettenò schrieb:
> If my desktop only has one Ethernet interface, no matter how many kernel
> changes happen, it'll always be eth0.
That was not true with the old persistent naming. One example which we
encountered in #gentoo IRC was the split between e1000 and e1000e drivers
which caus
On 29/03/13 13:01, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 29/03/2013 11:50, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Not false, but configurable, and linked from the news item -- nobody
stopping you from eg. using MAC addresses instead of PCI slots for
defining the names, just like one would have renamed them using MAC wit
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Title: The new default predictable network interface naming with udev
This is too long. GLEP 42 says:
| Title: A short (maximum 44 characters) descriptive title.
Also:
| The text body should be wrapped at 72 characters.
Ulrich
Hi,
I no longer have IPv6 so I don't use this package anymore. If someone is
willing to maintain it
please add yourself to metadata.xml. There are currently 2 open bugs
[1][2]. If a user wants to help,
contact proxy-maint_at_gentoo_dot_org[3]
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=439796
[2]
On 29/03/2013 11:50, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Not false, but configurable, and linked from the news item -- nobody
> stopping you from eg. using MAC addresses instead of PCI slots for
> defining the names, just like one would have renamed them using MAC with
> 70-persistent-net.rules
Which I usual
On 29/03/13 12:46, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 29/03/2013 11:26, Samuli Suominen wrote:
With the new predictable network interface naming scheme which upstream enabled
by default you don't have to rename anymore because the names will be static
and not randomly rename when you, for example, upg
On 29/03/2013 11:26, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> With the new predictable network interface naming scheme which upstream
> enabled
> by default you don't have to rename anymore because the names will be static
> and not randomly rename when you, for example, upgrade the kernel. This can be
> very imp
El jue, 28-03-2013 a las 19:15 +0100, Michał Górny escribió:
> Hello,
>
> As discussed with ulm, I'd like to start a thread for collecting
> initial items for EAPI 6. Preferably items which are either almost
> ready or are easy to implement and are non-controversial. In other
> words, thing which
On 29/03/13 12:24, Duncan wrote:
Samuli Suominen posted on Fri, 29 Mar 2013 10:09:27 +0200 as excerpted:
This feature will also replace the functionality of sys-apps/biosdevname
which you should uninstall. However, you can still keep using
sys-apps/biosdevname if you want.
I'd suggest...
Thi
Samuli Suominen posted on Fri, 29 Mar 2013 10:09:27 +0200 as excerpted:
> This feature will also replace the functionality of sys-apps/biosdevname
> which you should uninstall. However, you can still keep using
> sys-apps/biosdevname if you want.
I'd suggest...
This feature can optionally replac
Dne Čt 28. března 2013 19:15:59, Michał Górny napsal(a):
> Hello,
>
> As discussed with ulm, I'd like to start a thread for collecting
> initial items for EAPI 6. Preferably items which are either almost
> ready or are easy to implement and are non-controversial. In other
> words, thing which are p
This is required for stabilizing new udev (bug #463614)
And required otherwise too as people are still confused from what I have
seen in forums
I hope this isn't too much of an hand holding
Will push it tomorrow'ish if noone complains (and fix grammar later too
if required)
Thanks for lookin
38 matches
Mail list logo
