On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 06:59:50PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> You make some good points. I'll answer your questions as best as I can,
> but we can consider this thread closed. I will not try to put the
> virtual in, but I will come back to the list soon and start another
> thread.
>
> In a nuts
You make some good points. I'll answer your questions as best as I can,
but we can consider this thread closed. I will not try to put the
virtual in, but I will come back to the list soon and start another
thread.
In a nutshell, our networking is a beast, and we should try to simplify
it some how
Markos Chandras wrote:
> Please do not let Peter render another thread useless.
Isn't it obvious that the discussion about forks is both related to
cron *and* useful on its own?
It's not really possible to view an entire thread as a single item.
Life is more complicated than that, for good and ba
On Sat, 14 Dec 2013 15:57:04 -0600
William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 08:47:01PM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> wrote:
> > OK, I see what you mean.
> > To be clear, I'm not ready to have a stage3 without netifrc. If /
> > when we update catalyst so that the new stage3 is the sum
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 08:47:01PM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> OK, I see what you mean.
> To be clear, I'm not ready to have a stage3 without netifrc. If / when we
> update catalyst so that the new stage3 is the sum of @system and
> additional packages, we can move netifrc to that
On Sat, 14 Dec 2013, William Hubbs wrote:
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 05:56:33AM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, William Hubbs wrote:
My issue with what we are currently doing is not whether we have a
default network provider in the stages or not, but it is just that
# Johannes Huber (14 Dec 2013)
# Masked for removal in 30 days. Not packaged in current
# stable KDE SC 4.11 and later.
kde-base/kdegraphics-strigi-analyzer
kde-base/kdesdk-misc
kde-base/kdesdk-scripts
kde-base/kdesdk-strigi-analyzer
kde-base/kstartperf
kde-base/kuiviewer
kde-base/solid
--
Johann
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 05:56:33AM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > My issue with what we are currently doing is not whether we have a
> > default network provider in the stages or not, but it is just that the
> > netifrc use flag on OpenRC
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:57:55PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> My issue with what we are currently doing is not whether we have a
> default network provider in the stages or not, but it is just that the
> netifrc use flag on OpenRC is bogus. OpenRC doesn't need netifrc for any
> reason.
>
> I th
On 12/11/2013 03:03 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>
>> Is cronie a drop-in replacement, or do I have to do some thinking when
>> replacing vixie-cron?
>>
>
> It should be a drop-in. The only change to make would be to remove
> vixie-cron and add cronie to the default runlevel.
>
I noticed two small d
On Sat, 7 Dec 2013 07:42:48 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> By all means have an @useful-utils set or some kind of profile that
> auto-installs a list of packages like openssh, vim, and so on.
> However, these are not required to bootstrap a system
Since we do want net-misc/rsync, having net-misc/op
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013, Pavlos Ratis wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197625#c14
> >
> > This has reminded me that maybe we should switch to cronie from
> > vixie-cron as default and recommended cron provider in Handbook. Last
> > time
William Hubbs posted on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:03:57 -0600 as excerpted:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 07:53:59PM +, Duncan wrote:
>> William Hubbs posted on Fri, 13 Dec 2013 11:23:07 -0600 as excerpted:
>>
>>> There are reasons to run the rc binary directly; this is how you
>>> should be changing
13 matches
Mail list logo
