Patrick Lauer writes:
> For python things you really want python or C instead of C++...
Well, we have boost-python to do python extensions in C++. And yes,
introducing boost as a dependency to portage is not cool.
>> I guess the dep-tree calculation is the slowest part.
> Yes, it's doing lots
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 07:17 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:30:46 -0600 Ryan Hill
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:29:26 -0500 "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 01/09/20
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 07:12 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:41:08 -0600
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:30:04AM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>> Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2014, 00:26:03 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> Pleas
On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 17:52 -0800, Patrick McLean wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 02:19:03 +0100
> Tom Wijsman wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:31:21 +0800
> > Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >
> > > On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
> > > Last I checked paludis wasn't faster - on averag
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-01-06, o godz. 20:20:03
> "Robin H. Johnson" napisał(a):
>
> > 2.4. For stack repos/overlays:
> > 2.4.1. No prefix: replace all prior mirrors from masters with new URLS
> in this file.
> > 2.4.2. "-" prefix: remove this URL from the
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 18:59:26
Rich Freeman napisał(a):
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
> wrote:
> > I never felt manipulating cflags with use flags was a great idea, but in
> > this case is does feel extra pointless.
> >
>
> Tend to agree, though one place I could
Dnia 2014-01-06, o godz. 20:20:03
"Robin H. Johnson" napisał(a):
> 2.4. For stack repos/overlays:
> 2.4.1. No prefix: replace all prior mirrors from masters with new URLS in
> this file.
> 2.4.2. "-" prefix: remove this URL from the list from masters.
> 2.4.2. "+" prefix: append this URL to the
On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:58:46 +0100
Magnus Granberg wrote:
> Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> (-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
> The affected Gcc version will be 4.8.2 and newer. Only amd64, x86, mips, ppc,
> ppc64 and arm
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:52:16 -0800
Patrick McLean wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 02:19:03 +0100
> Tom Wijsman wrote:
>
> > Or rather: "What does it take to migrate parts of pkgcore into
> > portage?"
>
> Why not just switch to using pkgcore as the default package manager.
Has anyone switched to
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 02:19:03 +0100
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:31:21 +0800
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>
> > On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
> > > Igor writes:
> > >
> > >> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the
> > >> failure rate is about t
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 08:31:21 +0800
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
> > Igor writes:
> >
> >> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the
> >> failure rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
> >
> > I am curious about the slown
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:16:47 +0900
hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
> Igor writes:
>
> > The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
> > rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
>
> I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
Try a --backtrack=0 approach, I no longer
On 01/10/2014 08:16 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote:
> Igor writes:
>
>> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
>> rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
>
> I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
>
> How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-c
Hey Igor,
Igor writes:
> Jeroen, tell me how many users world wide do not prefer to upgrade Gentoo
> on automated basis? There are important servers, and there are many
> cases when after upgrade server stops. Do you remember that recent udev
> change? And there are many similar cases. Imagine t
Igor writes:
> The ebuilds have approximately the same time to install, the failure
> rate is about the same, emerge is getting slower.
I am curious about the slowness of emerge.
How about profile the portage and rewrite the time-crucial part in
C/C++, or ideally, borrowing the counterpart from
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:30:46 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:29:26 -0500
> "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
> > > "Anthony G. Ba
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 17:41:08 -0600
William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:30:04AM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2014, 00:26:03 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> > >
> > > > Please avoid "noblah" use flags.
> > > >
> > > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/us
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
wrote:
> I never felt manipulating cflags with use flags was a great idea, but in
> this case is does feel extra pointless.
>
Tend to agree, though one place I could see it being hypothetically
useful is if we need to set a use-dep. That i
On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:58:46 +0100
Magnus Granberg wrote:
> - use hardened && make_gcc_hard
> + if ( tc_version_is_at_least 4.8 || use hardened ) && ! use vanilla ;
> then
s/4.8/4.8.2
Or should we wait until the next release (4.8.3 or 4.9.0)? I think I'd
prefer it but I don't have a g
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:30:04AM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2014, 00:26:03 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> >
> > > Please avoid "noblah" use flags.
> > >
> > > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/use-flags/
> > >
> > > ssp flag that defaults to on is fine.
> >
> >
Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2014, 00:26:03 schrieb Ryan Hill:
>
> > Please avoid "noblah" use flags.
> >
> > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/use-flags/
> >
> > ssp flag that defaults to on is fine.
>
> This flag already exists and has always worked this way.
"already exists and has alw
On 01/09/2014 06:13 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 06:01 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
"Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho
On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:29:26 -0500
"Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
> > "Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
> >
> >> On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 06:09 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 01/09/2014 05:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
>>> "
On Thu, 09 Jan 2014 16:11:28 -0500
"Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 01/09/2014 03:58 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> > (-fstack-protector) by default. So we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 06:01 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
>> "Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
>>
>>> On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
What are the advantages of di
On 01/09/2014 05:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
"Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
What are the advantages of disabling
On 01/09/2014 05:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
"Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
What are the advantages of disabling
On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
"Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
What are the advantages of disabling SSP to deserve that "special"
handling via USE flag or easily disabling it appending the flag?
There a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
> "Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
>
>> On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>> What are the advantages of disabling SSP to deserve that "special"
>>> handling via
Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
"Anthony G. Basile" napisał(a):
> On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > What are the advantages of disabling SSP to deserve that "special"
> > handling via USE flag or easily disabling it appending the flag?
>
> There are some cases where ssp could brea
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 04:11:28PM -0500, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 01/09/2014 03:58 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> > (-fstack-protector) by default. So we
El jue, 09-01-2014 a las 17:06 -0500, Anthony G. Basile escribió:
> On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El jue, 09-01-2014 a las 21:58 +0100, Magnus Granberg escribió:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> >> (-fstack-protector) by default.
torsdag 09 januari 2014 22.57.09 skrev Pacho Ramos:
> El jue, 09-01-2014 a las 21:58 +0100, Magnus Granberg escribió:
> > Hi
> >
> > Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> > (-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
> > The affected Gcc vers
On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El jue, 09-01-2014 a las 21:58 +0100, Magnus Granberg escribió:
Hi
Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
(-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
The affected Gcc version will be 4.8.2 and newer.
El jue, 09-01-2014 a las 21:58 +0100, Magnus Granberg escribió:
> Hi
>
> Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> (-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
> The affected Gcc version will be 4.8.2 and newer. Only amd64, x86, mips, ppc,
> pp
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/09/2014 03:58 PM, Magnus Granberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
> (-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
> The affected Gcc version will be 4.8.2 and newer. Onl
On 01/09/2014 03:42 PM, Igor wrote:
> Hello Duncan,
>
> Thursday, January 9, 2014, 9:59:50 PM, you wrote:
>
> Thank you for the reply. I started to comment first... but it was more
> philosophy a mature and grown up, experienced man and I don't think
> I have right to comment it.
>
> Statistical
Hi
Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing
(-fstack-protector) by default. So we opened a bug to track this [1].
The affected Gcc version will be 4.8.2 and newer. Only amd64, x86, mips, ppc,
ppc64 and arm will be affected by this change.
You can turn off ssp by using
Hello Duncan,
Thursday, January 9, 2014, 9:59:50 PM, you wrote:
Thank you for the reply. I started to comment first... but it was more
philosophy a mature and grown up, experienced man and I don't think
I have right to comment it.
Statistically if you have more users the probability of the syste
On 01/09/2014 08:20 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 09 December 2013 16:32:09 Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 12/09/2013 02:21 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
Hello
Is pam team still active? I wonder about this as, recently, we
On 9 January 2014 20:20, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> well, the sep herd was kind of by design ... i didn't want it cluttering up
> base-system@ and it is super convenient to abdicate all PAM decisions to a
> single herd.
Yeah the problem has been that the herd has been fundamentally a single
pers
On Monday 09 December 2013 16:32:09 Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 12/09/2013 02:21 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> Is pam team still active? I wonder about this as, recently, we have
> >> needed to go ahead and fix some bugs
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:24:25 +0400
LTHR wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> What do you think about implementing this:
>
> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=7477494
>
> I've system design in my head and could write it down with the
> implementation details. Then may be we could all review it and get to
Igor posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 16:44:02 +0400 as excerpted:
> There is no data to tell what happens with Gentoo (to give that data is
> one of the goals of the project). We only have some formal esteems from
> unreliable sources.
>
> According to distro watch:
>
> In February 2012, Gentoo distr
Hello Jeroen,
Thursday, January 9, 2014, 7:55:42 PM, you wrote:
I was expecting you a few hours earlier, Jeroen. I knew you
wouldn't resist a terrible temptation remembering the Python Bug
that I filed from the old kernel gentoo.
For your information this is a confirmed bug in Python right now a
Hello Ben,
Thursday, January 9, 2014, 7:49:28 PM, you wrote:
True, thanks for noting that.
> "What are distro watch and linux counter and who cares what their opt-in
> stats gathering says?"
> -most Gentoo users I've ever talked to
> I think if you drop the premise "Gentoo is dying, how do we
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 19:26:24 +0400
Igor wrote:
> >> For various reasons many techs were not implemented and now Gentoo
> >> is in a
> > kind of stagnation.
>
> > What do you mean by that in particular?
>
> Gentoo stopped.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=298754
https://bugs.gentoo.org/
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Igor wrote:
>
>
> According to distro watch:
>
> ...
> According to Linux Counter
>
> ...
>
"What are distro watch and linux counter and who cares what their opt-in
stats gathering says?"
-most Gentoo users I've ever talked to
I think if you drop the premise "Gen
Hello Christopher,
Thursday, January 9, 2014, 6:12:37 PM, you wrote:
> you motivate your proposal by claiming the Gentoo Project stagnates which you
> relate with its decline in popularity:
>> According to Linux Counter
>> http://web.archive.org/web/2012010100*/http://linuxcounter.net/distr
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> This is a small feature request, but it will require a modification to
> PMS, so I describe it here.
>
> The present thirdpartymirrors file is unwieldy, and difficult to manage
> due to it's format with very long lines. It also doesn't per
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Alex Xu wrote:
>
>
> Eww. Geographically-close files should be made available through
> GENTOO_MIRRORS and the regular distfiles system.
>
I think you may be missing the point of this proposal, or are unaware of
how profiles/thirdpartymirrors and SRC_URI="mirror:/
Hi,
you motivate your proposal by claiming the Gentoo Project stagnates which you
relate with its decline in popularity:
> According to Linux Counter
> http://web.archive.org/web/2012010100*/http://linuxcounter.net/distribut
> ions/stats.html
>
> In January 2012, Gentoo distro had 5.32%
> I
Due to bug 497262, I will mask the following packages for removal in 30 days.
net-libs/libguac-0.6.3
net-libs/libguac-0.7.0
net-libs/libguac-client-rdp-0.6.2
net-libs/libguac-client-rdp-0.7.0
net-libs/libguac-client-rdp-0.7.1
net-libs/libguac-client-vnc-0.6.1
net-libs/libguac-client-vnc-0.7.0
net-
Hello Alec,
Thursday, January 9, 2014, 12:12:18 PM, you wrote:
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:24 PM, LTHR wrote:
Hi All,
I want to start off by discussing your premise, before embarking on the overall
goals.
You wrote:
"I'm with Gentoo for many years. For various reasons many techs were not
imp
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:24 PM, LTHR wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
I want to start off by discussing your premise, before embarking on the
overall goals.
You wrote:
"I'm with Gentoo for many years. For various reasons many techs were not
implemented and now Gentoo is in a kind of stagnation. But we can
56 matches
Mail list logo
