[gentoo-dev] removing vulnerable versions of dev-lang/v8

For some context of this please see v8-3.20.17.7 fixes a memory corruption vulnerability, see However, we still have v8-3.19 and even 3.18 in portage - this is pr

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07.11.2013 21:18, Rich Freeman wrote: > Seriously, though, I'd love to see these needs better supported. > I think we need to start by defining what the needs actually are > (less redundancy, more consistency, etc). Then we figure out how > to best

Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy-level discussion for minimum versions on dependencies

Le jeudi 07 novembre 2013 à 10:44 +0100, Alexis Ballier a écrit : > in short: if a package requires version X then the ebuild should require > version X; it can be forgotten but it's a bug. That _is_ our policy. Ebuilds should - at the very least - mirror what upstream's build script requires. So

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On 11/07/2013 03:07 PM, Denis M. wrote: > On 11/07/2013 09:18 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Denis M. wrote: >>> On 11/07/2013 08:59 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: iirc, we give $200 if infra for developer accounts for a couple of months. If a deal is struck it wou

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 07/11/13 09:20 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Denis M. wrote: >> Almost every Gentoo dev that does software testings of some sorts >> could benefit from these "build farms" (although I'd refrain from >> using that term

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On 11/07/2013 09:18 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Denis M. wrote: >> On 11/07/2013 08:59 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: >>> iirc, we give $200 if infra for developer accounts for a couple of >>> months. If a deal is struck it would likely be more and forever or >>> something

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Denis M. wrote: > On 11/07/2013 08:59 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: >> iirc, we give $200 if infra for developer accounts for a couple of >> months. If a deal is struck it would likely be more and forever or >> something. > > I've been running my VM for Ago for 13 month

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On 11/07/2013 08:59 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: > On 11/07/2013 12:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: >> On 11/07/2013 02:48 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: >>> Rackspace (where I work) currently has a developer discount program. I >>> think we also host some open source stuff for various projects. Right >>> no

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On 11/07/2013 12:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: > On 11/07/2013 02:48 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: >> Rackspace (where I work) currently has a developer discount program. I >> think we also host some open source stuff for various projects. Right >> now you can try to use http://developer.rackspace.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On 11/07/2013 02:48 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: > Rackspace (where I work) currently has a developer discount program. I > think we also host some open source stuff for various projects. Right > now you can try to use http://developer.rackspace.com/ but if we want to > make this more official I can

Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy-level discussion for minimum versions on dependencies

Alexis Ballier wrote: > its kind of common sense IMHO Unfortunately what makes sense to people is never common. :\ > there shouldn't be any time limit .. > in short: if a package requires version X then the ebuild should > require version X; it can be forgotten but it's a bug. +1 //Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

Rackspace (where I work) currently has a developer discount program. I think we also host some open source stuff for various projects. Right now you can try to use http://developer.rackspace.com/ but if we want to make this more official I can ask around. Let me know if we want this as a more of

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Denis M. wrote: > Almost every Gentoo dev that does software testings of some sorts could > benefit from these "build farms" (although I'd refrain from using that > term ;) ..). Don't let me put a damper on your plans as-is, but I'd be interested if developers who

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

On 11/07/2013 12:53 PM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote: > Dear Denis, Hi Benda, > > "Denis M." writes: > >> Please review this, and if you agree that it'd be a good idea come >> with any suggestions to make it happen as well as with any other >> thoughts/sys-specs/instances we should be looking for. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion: support the Dev team with system resources

Dear Denis, "Denis M." writes: > Please review this, and if you agree that it'd be a good idea come > with any suggestions to make it happen as well as with any other > thoughts/sys-specs/instances we should be looking for. Thanks for the offering. Though not a member, AT teams might benefit fr

[gentoo-dev] Re: OCSP Was: friendly reminder wrt net virtual in init scripts

Thomas D. posted on Thu, 07 Nov 2013 02:00:29 +0100 as excerpted: > Duncan wrote: >> Meanwhile, another question for Thomas. Is this "certificate stapling" >> the same thing google chrome is now doing for the google site, that >> enabled it to detect the (I think it was) Iranian and/or Chinese CA

Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy-level discussion for minimum versions on dependencies

On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 13:04 -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 06/11/13 12:56 PM, yac wrote: > > On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 16:48:54 +0100 Alexis Ballier > > wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 10:15 -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > >>> However, it's been a long-standing general practise that if > >>