unsubscribe
Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> On Воскресенье 20 сентября 2009 11:47:30 Rémi Cardona wrote:
>
>> Le 20/09/2009 02:31, Ryan Hill a écrit :
>>
>>> If not, when can
>>> we drop support for old EAPIs? Your opinions please.
>>>
>> Let's drop it now. We've waited long enough. Portage with EAPI=
Dmitry Grigoriev wrote:
> Hello everyone.
>
> I posted an enhacement suggestion to bugzilla and was advised to discuss
> it here: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=282491 (please read with
> comments).
>
> The idea is that package tree physical structure must correspond to
> logical structure.
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> > Torsten Veller wrote:
> >> * Andrew D Kirch :
> >>
> >>> This should really be a non-issue. I just spent 2 days dealing with
> >>> being 3.5 weeks out of date.
> >>>
ementation speed of these EAPI's and quite a bit of
confusion with 10.0, along with much wharrgarbl and FUD. It also
consumed nearly the entire agenda of the previous Gentoo Council.
Things are getting better though.
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo.org
Torsten Veller wrote:
> * Andrew D Kirch :
>
>> This should really be a non-issue. I just spent 2 days dealing with
>> being 3.5 weeks out of date.
>>
>
> To help us improve the user experience, what were the problems that
> cost you two days?
>
>
Dale wrote:
>
> While I like your example, if this were to happen and a couple other
> things has been updated, like for example expat a while back and other
> similar update nightmares, wouldn't a reinstall be easier and most
> likely recommended anyway? I have seen this recommended and even made
sent is given by the council. This would hopefully
reduce contention with GLEP's as has happened in the past, and put
EAPI's closer to the devs who will implement them.
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo.org
s a hobby of
bureaucrats everywhere.
It could also be said to be "punishing excellence". We've had a lot of
political systems
which try to implement a design which weeds out both the mediocre, and
the excellent,
leaving us with the average all have been failures. The reason why
they fail is that it is
the above average who do the heaviest lifting.
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo.org
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 06:13:59 -0400
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
>
> > I look forward to seeing Funtoo's creation of EAPI funtoo-2.
>
Obviously you don't get it. We aren't going to spend time writing this
sort of spurious and unnec
r advocated is abuse.
This sort of behavior simply needs to stop. Using bugs.gentoo.org to
attack Funtoo, which utilizes Portage, in the manner which has been done
usurps the Gentoo Council's authority, the Portage devs, Funtoo, and
most importantly our ability to innovate.
And hell, if we're not going to innovate, lets all please pack up and go
home.
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo.org
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 02:08:01 -0400
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
> Given that your stated intention is for "Paludis to fail", and that
> "opposing [me] and everything [I] do was an initiative [you] started
> only after careful considerat
ngs your way. Then when that doesn't happen you throw a temper
tantrum. You sir, are killing Gentoo for these and many other reasons,
and I demand that you stop, I will also unilaterally oppose you until
you do.
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo.org
PS: Ciaran, Thank you for comparing me to Rush Limbaugh, I consider it a
compliment.
Yeah, that was definately a misunderstanding of something bonzaikitten said.
Mea culpa.
Andrew
Brian Harring wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 02:08:01AM -0400, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
>> Ciaran,
>>
>> I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use t
Ciaran,
I've talked with the pkgcore people and they don't use the EAPI's (or
PMS) in the first place. This essentially leaves you writing documents
you're requiring for paludis support. As this seems to be mostly a PM
issue, it should be taken elsewhere. To that end, here is a
gentoo-portage-d
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 1:27 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:20:09 +0530
>>> Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>>>
Allowing him to proxy in a council meeting is both disallowed
(non-gentoo devs cannot be
Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Fri, June 26, 2009 03:13, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
>> Please be quiet.
>>
>
> why ?, maillists is imho made to be used in non silent mode else one could
> aswell argue to close it down
>
>
Mailing lists he's been booted
nuous problem rather than simply
contained in this one
incident.)
Andrew D Kirch
Funtoo
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:20:09 +0530
> Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>
>> Allowing him to proxy in a council meeting is both disallowed
>> (non-gentoo devs cannot be on the council)
>>
>
> Please point to the rule that says that a non-developer cannot be on
> the Council,
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> All,
>
> The current council meetings have gotten completely out of hand for
> weeks meetings have become nothing more then a continuation of the
> senseless bicker-fest that have become the e-mail threads on GLEP54,
> GLEP55, and EAPI-3 without any real progress or sense co
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
>> Why is it inappropriate to discuss the poor UI, and implementation of
>> software we use especially in open source? Maybe if we're closed to
>> valid argument against poor
Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> Andrew D Kirch wrote:
>
>> I think it's best as a general rule to NEVER _EVER_ under any
>> circumstances emulate paludis.
>>
>
> While I'm not personally a fan of paludis, it doesn't help anyone to post crap
> like th
Timothy Redaelli wrote:
> On Saturday 04 April 2009 18:12:09 Thilo Bangert wrote:
>
>>> 'guess'. Like how you have to guess what use flags are really being
>>> used for the package in question, because it doesn't tell you?
>>>
>> i'd like to ask the developers of package managers to stand
I was looking to do a workaround on a per compiler basis.
I'm looking at toolchain-funcs.eclass, and specifically
${gcc-fullversion}. I've got a broken ebuild (dhcdbd) which requires
-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE to compile correctly with GCC 4.3.3. But reading
tells me that I should not use this eclass to s
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Andrew D Kirch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
Looks like you counted the number of files in the files/
subdirectories. Not all of these are patches. Also, you probably
forgot to count seds, as some of us use sed more than patche
Rémi Cardona wrote:
Andrew D Kirch wrote:
Obviously the software needs to work, and therefore we need patches, but
Gentoo has not done enough to date to get them pushed upstream. Lets
look at some cringeworthy statistics on outstanding patches.
Have you even _looked_ at the patches? Can you
It has become abundantly clear that distribution maintainers should have
as few patches as possible. Patches waste time due to duplicate work,
resources (portage disk space and bandwidth), and as the Debian project
recently found out after a major vulnerability was discovered in the
OpenSSH pa
27 matches
Mail list logo
