Hi all,
I'm the one that had asked WilliamH about splitting out OldNet from
OpenRC, so I figured rather than respond to every single part of this
thread, I wanted to give a general response.
Misc preamble:
--
If you're a student considering GSoC, reading this email, and this
interests
I *really* hate those virtual dependencies that don't actually satisfy
a real dependency, and require manual choice-specific intervention by
the user anyway. For example, packages that build external kernel
modules tend to depend on virtual/kernel-sources. However, this
dependency doesn't make sure
Carlos Silva wrote:
> John Doe
..runs Windows.
> is it a safe default meaning that 99% or more of the people will
> use or *need* it?
Nobody suggested that networking should be disabled or excluded by default.
//Peter
On Thursday 25 April 2013 15:09:28 viv...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 04/24/13 21:17, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 09:00:17PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:16:06 -0500 William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> This means when you emerge or upgrade to openrc-0.12, the net.* s
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:15 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>
Maybe I was miss understood here. I know that there are tons of ways to
have gentoo *running* in a box without it having network connection. The
thing is that makes like 0.01% of the total installs. It's not a default
ins
Carlos Silva posted on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:13:56 + as excerpted:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> It it isn't necessary for a system to have support for either oldnet or
>> newnet. Sure, it is rare these days, but networking support should be
>> a default, not a r
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 01:30:25PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 02:16:51PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > if we keep a dependency for a while, even behind something like
> > > IUSE="+oldnet", when we drop it, peop
i've opened http://bugs.gentoo.org/467256 to track glibc-2.16 stabilization.
with the 2.18 release process starting up in a month or so, we need to make
room for it now that 2.17 is in ~arch. that means 2.16 going into arch since
it isn't realistically seeing anymore testing.
-mike
signature
On 04/24/13 21:17, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 09:00:17PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:16:06 -0500
>> William Hubbs wrote:
>>
>>> This means when you emerge or upgrade to openrc-0.12, the net.* scripts
>>> will no longer be included. I am going to call th
On Thursday 25 April 2013 14:27:39 G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
> When "gentoo-oldscripts" is pulled from openrc
>
> WHAT will be the default network configuration method?
the existing defaults will remain the same. we're just debating how to
guarantee that.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This i
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM, G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
> I have just one question
>
> When "gentoo-oldscripts" is pulled from openrc
>
> WHAT will be the default network configuration method?
"gentoo-oldscripts"
The intent isn't to remove these scripts (unless for some reason you
don't wan
I have just one question
When "gentoo-oldscripts" is pulled from openrc
WHAT will be the default network configuration method?
Without the "standard" net scripts, many systems will break.
What is being given for network configuration?
NetworkManager? (yuck!)
--
G.Wolfe Woodbury
redwo...@g
On Wednesday 24 April 2013 19:17:01 William Hubbs wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 06:34:46PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 02:16:51PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote
> > > Considering our default configuration ships sshd (an argument we don't
> > > need to rehash here), it seems
On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:13:56 +
Carlos Silva wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Rich Freeman
> wrote:
>
> > It it isn't necessary for a system to have support for either
> > oldnet or newnet. Sure, it is rare these days, but networking
> > support should be a default, not a requiremen
Carlos Silva wrote:
> > > Care to explain how will the installation be done if "networking"
> > > isn't requirement?
> >
> > I build a stage4 tarball on a build host, and unpack that tarball
> > onto the media that I want to run the target system on.
>
> And from where comes this build host exactl
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Carlos Silva wrote:
> > Care to explain how will the installation be done if "networking"
> > isn't requirement?
>
> I build a stage4 tarball on a build host, and unpack that tarball
> onto the media that I want to run the target system on.
>
Carlos Silva wrote:
> Care to explain how will the installation be done if "networking"
> isn't requirement?
I build a stage4 tarball on a build host, and unpack that tarball
onto the media that I want to run the target system on.
That's just one way. The point is that nothing fundamentally requi
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
> wrote:
> > Hey, all!
> >
> > Just one question: why do you all talking about IUSE=+oldnet, but not
> > REQUIRED_USE="^^ ( net oldnet )" for example?
>
> It it isn't necessary for
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
wrote:
> Hey, all!
>
> Just one question: why do you all talking about IUSE=+oldnet, but not
> REQUIRED_USE="^^ ( net oldnet )" for example?
It it isn't necessary for a system to have support for either oldnet
or newnet. Sure, it is rar
Hey, all!
Just one question: why do you all talking about IUSE=+oldnet, but not
REQUIRED_USE="^^ ( net oldnet )" for example?
24.04.2013 23:16, William Hubbs пишет:
> All,
>
> it has been suggested that gentoo's oldnet scripts be split out into
> their own package separate from OpenRC so that
René Neumann wrote:
> * Is there a real difference between them? As far as I can see XSL
> is a superset of XSLT, but it's somewhat fuzzy.
XSL is the Extensible Stylesheet Language, one way to think of this
is as the file format. XSL is a subset of XML.
XSLT means XSL Transform, which is the proc
On 25/04/13 10:45, René Neumann wrote:
> There is exactly one user of it: php -- to pull in libxslt.
>
> * Should php remain 'xsl' or go to 'xslt'?
The reason for using xsl is that PHP had two xsl(t) extensions: one
called xslt and one called xsl. Before we had USE flags for both of
these to dis
Le jeudi 25 avril 2013 à 10:45 +0200, René Neumann a écrit :
> Dear all,
>
> I noticed, that there is a global useflag 'xsl', with one of those
> bleh-descriptions "Enables XSL support"
>
> There is exactly one user of it: php -- to pull in libxslt.
>
> Now there is also the local useflag xslt (
The correct one should be xslt and that's it..
Dear all,
I noticed, that there is a global useflag 'xsl', with one of those
bleh-descriptions "Enables XSL support"
There is exactly one user of it: php -- to pull in libxslt.
Now there is also the local useflag xslt (used by three other packages)
for enabling xslt support (by pulling in libxsl
# Ulrich Müller (25 Apr 2013)
# Dependency of kernel.eclass which was obsoleted in 2004,
# apparantly no uses besides Gentoo specific kernel patching,
# license issues. Masked for removal in 30 days, bug #444314.
app-admin/addpatches
pgpUaMftQEX4A.pgp
Description: PGP signature
26 matches
Mail list logo
