On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 18:27 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 16:25 -0800, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> > 1x HP ZX2000 1.4 GHz Itanium2
>
> I know that you said off-list, but I'm stating this here simply because
> I want to make sure people know that I have
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 16:25 -0800, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> All:
>
> As I am no longer an ebuild dev (real life job got in the way) I have a
> whole slew of hardware that I'm willing to ship to any gentoo dev for
> the cost of shipping alone. The list of hardware is as follows:
All:
As I am no longer an ebuild dev (real life job got in the way) I have a
whole slew of hardware that I'm willing to ship to any gentoo dev for
the cost of shipping alone. The list of hardware is as follows:
1x HP C3700 750 MHz PA-RISC
1x Dec/Compaq PWS 600 600 MHz Alpha
1x SGI Octane2 Dual 19
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 00:06 +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Since dostrow is being retired or is retired, correct me if I'm wrong
> we decided (actually we rolled dices :-) that welp is the new lead.
Not really retired, just not doing ebuild work anymore (only doing
events management for LWE and t
> Yeah, I tend to agree. Not-so-coincidentally, Gentoo's been invited to
> join the Software Freedom Conservancy, which would provide just the sort
> of 3rd-party management that you're suggesting. I put a write-up on my
> blog detailing what we know so far:
>
> http://www.grantgoodyear.org
One additional note, my proposal doesn't account for controlling
flaming, disrespect or general asshatery (discounting outright
ridiculous things like blatantly insulting people, that's a no-no). That
I am afraid is just one of the natures of communities our size. There is
no way we can curtail p
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 13:24 -0700, Mike Doty wrote:
> All-
>
> We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only
> devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. devs who moderate
> in
> bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. in addition the
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 01:39 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> the new util-linux package has merged the setarch binary. for the upgrade
> path, i figure we do:
> - drop sys-apps/setarch from profiles
> - add sys-apps/setarch to util-linux-2.12 based on arch?()
> - add !sys-apps/setarch to util-li
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 14:09 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm back for my yearly posting about creating a gentoo-dev-announce
> list [1]. Fedora recently created a fedora-devel-announce list with a
> great description of how it works, what's posted to it, etc [2], which
> got me exci
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 23:35 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 15:31:32 -0700
> > Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 22:01 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > The specific underlyi
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 21:11 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 11:39:26AM -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > Internet Explorer doesn't even *run* on Gentoo. If it did, it
> > would likely be in the tree since quite a few people would likely use
> > it, even if just for testing.
On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 18:08 +0200, Christian Heim wrote:
> It's my pleasure to welcome back Deedra Waters (also known as dmwaters on
> IRC).
>
> Deedra is joining us from Pensacola, FL. She is going to work on the
> accessibility stuff (she is blind), will be re-joining Developer Relations,
> and
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 23:18 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> I know this issue is not actually in the scope of this list, but
> maybe some of you might be interested:
>
> Lots of packages have optional parts which (IMHO) should/could be
> their own packages, ie. GUI frontends to c
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:36 +0100, Mike Auty wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hiya,
> Reading over the discussion on lkml, it appears that it only affects
> x86_64 systems...
> Mike 5:)
Mine is an x86_64 system...it also only seems to affect early adopters
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:11 +0200, Florian D. wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2.6.21 was released today. Testing muchly appreciated as usual -- please
> > file bugs and clearly mark them as 2.6.21 regressions if that is the case.
> >
>
> hello,
> 2.6.21 will break the current *stabl
On Sat, 2007-04-28 at 22:04 -0400, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-04-27 at 11:28 +0200, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > It would be nice if there where some CD/DVD labels created, that people
> > could print and put on their
> The *only* downside that I can see here is that by default the package
> installation process gets a little longer. To get around this some
> method of globally opting out of src_test should be provided to the end
> user, however since it is an on by default feature someone at least has
> *tried
> > > Er, no, I'm explaining why enforcing src_test for EAPI 1 will be
> > > helpful for an awful lot of Gentoo developers.
> >
> > except that you back the tree into a corner that it cannot come out of
>
> Huh? Not at all. If a package can't use its test suite, the ebuild can
> set RESTRICT=te
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 10:00 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > There's a ChangeLog file in profiles/ChangeLog now. Please use it when
> > making changes to things in profiles/*...
>
> Should we prefer this location for trees that already have a ChangeLog
> in them as well
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 17:37 +, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 07:19:44PM +0200 or thereabouts, Alin Nastac wrote:
> > I say we should have +all (SPF-capable MTAs will consider any IP address
> > as authorized to send mail on behalf of g.o - equivalent with "Message
> > source OK")
On Sun, 2006-10-15 at 22:01 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 22:35:10 +0200 Jakub Moc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | > Which is why I suggested changing Portage's behaviour earlier in the
> | > thread. Like it or not, overlays are already getting complex enough
> | > that they'd
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 19:16 +0200, Lionel Bouton wrote:
> Josh Saddler wrote the following on 03.10.2006 18:11 :
> > (...)
> > > Lionel
> > Uh, Gentoo-wiki does not get linked.
>
> Are there many trying to link to the Gentoo Wiki in official
> documentation? It seems guns are warm and devs quick t
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 18:42 -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> This whole thread is quite disappointing to me. Someone comes up with a
> new way to use Gentoo; to make it a viable tool for a job; to make it
> USEFUL. This is what we are about here (or were?).
>
> "Put another way, the Gentoo philosophy
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 00:56 +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> First step should imho be, that you work with the Portage team on having
> proper set support implemented. Current meta ebuilds do suck, really.
No need for meta ebuilds...stage4 specs + catalyst.
--Dan
signature.asc
Description: This
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 21:23 -0700, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 15:03 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 18:49 +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> > > I am just wondering, how does this affect European developers? Does this
> > > ma
On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 15:03 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-09 at 18:49 +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> > I am just wondering, how does this affect European developers? Does this
> > make us financially active in the US even if we work for a European
> > company due to the fact
One last reminder...this weekend is the last weekend polls are open.
Polls close at 00:00 UTC on Monday the 11th so if you haven't voted yet
now is the time...lets see if we can break the 50% turnout mark!
--Dan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
> > So yeah, buy him a pint and welcome him onboard!
>
> SMTP, IMAP and POP3 don't support that.
>
What...you have never heard of PPP, the Pint to Pint protocol...
(Sorry about this clear waste of bandwidth...it's early and my pun
senses still have control of my fingers...)
--Dan
signatur
On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 01:22 +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> Hailing from Pittsburgh, PA, the cognitive science department at
> Carnegie Mellon University comes Mike Kelly aka pioto. Already known by
> some of us from his excellent work on dynusers[1] during this years
> Summer of Code he now co
> > I like this option better than sticking another file into the public
> > tree that no user will ever need.
>
> Instead, modifying the eclass metadata and adding two new keys, that
> users will never need is fine? :)
>
> This isn't really user data, tiz developer data; thus the user bit
>
On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:08 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 05:51:07AM +, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the
> > 2nd Thursday once a month), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> > irc.freenode.net) !
> Is th
On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 17:26 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > We've had a global vision for where Gentoo is going from before I
> > joined - Gentoo is here to create a source-based distribution where
> > each package is
On Thu, 2006-08-24 at 20:55 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Lance Albertson wrote:
>
> > Anyways, I'm not going to take any more flame bait since I'm sick and
> > tired of this shit.
>
> And my intention was not to revive that precise debate. I'm just saying
> that for the "leader" (or "strong cou
> If I could go back in time a couple of years and prevent this democracy
> from ever happening, I would. If I could fix these problems myself, I
> would. But it requires buy-in from the entire Gentoo community if we're
> to do anything about it.
First of suffice it to say that many a time in
> Some notes on some of the other people from my POV..
>
> -- Busy/Next Year/Other --
> dostrow (not around enough)
I'd agree that my availability over the past 6 months has been spotty at
best. I was ramping up for a cross country move and all that that
entails as well as dealing with a new po
After mulling it over for a bit I think I could actually do some good
here. Plus another name in the hat makes the elections that much more
interestingas my campaign pledge I promise to establish a developer
juice bar (I tried for the ice cream machine but the lactose intolerance
lobby is just
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 19:04 -0400, Luis Francisco Araujo wrote:
> Stephen Bennett wrote:
> > Continuing in the series of issues raised during the previous package
> > manager discussions, I'd like to continue by mentioning the tree
> > format. At present, it isn't defined beyond "what the current p
Comments inline ...
On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 13:37 +0200, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various
> other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should
> satisfy all involved parties here. This should adress dostrow's demands
> as
On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 14:46 -0500, James Potts wrote:
> On 6/9/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > > Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > > > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > > > repeating
On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 20:12 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Peper wrote:
> >>> well. A couple of examples:
> >>>
> >>> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122500
> >> And again, you use my project of an example. Perhaps you should try
> >> looking at something that actually supports your argument?
>
> Your claim, specifically, was "It *is* essential if paludis were to
> ever be used for release building.". There is more than one way to skin
> a cat, and some of those ways don't involve getting blood all over the
> floor.
Unfortunately in this case there is only one cat, he has only one skin
On Friday 24 March 2006 15:06, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> On Friday 24 March 2006 14:35, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> > After reading through that fairly lengthy thread, I'm afraid that I can
> > no longer tell exactly what is being proposed. Who has read access?
> > Who h
eated
overlays in order to promote them.
Hope that helps,
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpKBvrnkBVTM.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ve to be made VERY clear
to our users, e.g. a you use it you get to keep the pieces policy, and the
developer or team in question is the *only* point of contact for fixing
things) -or- it is an Official overlay with official support which means it
needs to abide by the rules...
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpQyEPKB2Xy4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
allowed for easy merging.
I agree, I'd love to see something like this, that way I could have my xfce
stuff someplace more public then my devspacethe only thing that would
have to be clear is how official the overlays actually were, e.g. how prone
the team looking after the ov
On Monday 06 March 2006 13:18, Simon Stelling wrote:
> Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> > Hrm, /me thinks you are missing something there, almost the entire tree
> > doesn't explicitly state the mirror://gentoo SRC_URI, portage handles
> > that automatically. That being the case po
s that
automatically. That being the case portage would have change so that the
automatic lookup was mirror://gentoo/${firstchar}/. So that is at least one
portage change I can think of being required
Sure I can still see your point about needing to manually change the packages
that do ex
all of us as a whole (even if
that sometimes means that the experiance for a particular package or two
needs to be a little worse). Tree QA is something that we have never had
before, at least not really (don't mean to trivialize the work that
Mr_Bones_ does). It is something that I believe
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 22:17 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 17:02 -0500, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> > That would work for fetch restricted packages, not nomirrored ones.
> >
> > --Dan
>
> /me nods. That's what we'll have to do. Unfortun
On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 21:54 +, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 13:29 -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > Simply tell the user to download X and place it in $DISTDIR renaming it
> > to X-foo-bar, where's you've chosen X-foo-bar to avoid conflicts.
>
> That works for me.
>
> Best r
> I'll contact the council separately, and ask that they look at two
> things:
>
> a) What the QA team is and isn't empowered to do
> b) The approval process that the QA team must follow before imposing
> tree-wide changes on other developers.
According to prior council meeting logs:
15:14 <@vap
e cases into a ${} for
people reading it that weren't involed in the implementaiton so that know
that unless the repo is actually named 'repoid' no such file will exist.
Thanks and +1,
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ery much like Gentoo the small 'Board of
Directors' in this book is.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpD27FoRXXBc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
ng more,
nothing less. Sure we wouldn't be shipping the actual source, but what
we would be doing is facilitating your use of said source, which is
*illegal*.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
to use an
illegally licensed program, we would be facilitating such an act. That
is something we cannot and will not do.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
the text links below each advertisement
graphic also be underlined. The implication of the current text is that
they are not links at all when they are.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
at you are proposing, and I understand
that the present CVS server cannot handle this sort of load but I
believe that this was the original intention at least...someone correct
me if I am wrong.
I think that this issue has to be nailed down *before* we get any
further in discussion.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
tem build.
If RelEng ever does get to the point of removing stage's 1 & 2 from the
mirrors (something that has been discussed but isn't on the table at all
right now) end users and developers alike will still be able to generate
them on their own using catalyst and the provided
eemant
> | Kulleen.
> |
> | The deadline for submitting items for the meeting agenda is set to
> | Sunday, November 13th, 20:00 UTC.
>
> Assuming there aren't any further comments between now and then, I'd
> like GLEP 34 (GLEP File Hosting) to be approved please.
>
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 14:02 -0500, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > After going through the list, I got the impression there is simply no
> > place where such messages clearly would go. gentoo-announce sounds as
> > the best option to go for, but its descript
up for, and worse send them info about your configuration),
so the filtering is done for you. We will *never* do something like
this, we have a client side tool that can identify what is installed
already...why not use it?
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64
up for, and worse send them info about your configuration),
so the filtering is done for you. We will *never* do something like
this, we have a client side tool that can identify what is installed
already...why not use it?
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
ve to, link to further more detailed
*documentation*. Note then that what would go up on errata.g.o in this
case would be the *summary* (which would not necessarily be governed by
the GDP or it's policies) and *not* the full documentation. Said summary
would contain links to any relevant *d
ly on a given arch for one bitness but not the other...and
masking it out completely means that the one bitness where it would work
looses functionality unnecessarily.
Yeah I know this adds a whole additional layer of complexity to the
picture but seeing how DEPEND="!arch? ( use? ( app-foo/bar
On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 13:47 -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> 2.0.51_rc4
And by 2.0.51_rc4 he really meant 2.0.53_rc4. :)
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
oks good to me...
Also I have all of the modular X deps for XFCE4 enumerated locally in an
overlay on my machine...which changes the deps in the eclass a tad...we
should coordinate on this before you commit it.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
less we have the right to do so.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
are commercial packages. You don't want them...fine...exclude them.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
g things too badly. As such it gets an inherently far
smaller test base then packages in ~arch do.
Personally I am uncomfortable with people using ~arch as a "We didn't
get enough testing for package X, so we are putting it here for a wider
audience." mentality. That is the whole purpo
maintainer.
Personally I like this outlook a lot better then the maint ~maint option
because it provides information and fits into present policy. All in all
it really isn't that hard to open a bug.
If the package is truly not stable then it should really be moved back
into p.mask anyway.
--
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
riate abi internally. Mips is slightly different as it is a niche
architecture with a smaller, arguably better educated in the ways of gcc
etc., user base.
I don't know what the ratio is for amd64 and x86 (I suspect far better
then ppc64 vs. ppc as the dev/user base is far larger) but I thi
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 15:12 -0700, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 22:19 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > | but I think having the xml configuration files allows a much more
> > | robust configuration.
> >
> > How so? Using XML doesn't magically make your data files any different
> Who is the other husband/wife developer team?
>
Well before she left and he went MIA there was Eric and Aida Sammer...
> Regards,
> Aron
>
> --
> Aron Griffis
> Gentoo Linux Developer
>
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Chris:
Good to know you are going to make it, I'll be there too. :)
And yes I think it would be awesome if we had a presentation on the
release process.
--Dan
On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 09:38 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-05-24 at 09:51 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005
heads up.
Daniel Ostrow
Gentoo/{PPC,PPC64,DevRel}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 12:36 Wed 04 May , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> First of all there are a lot of questions to answer:
>
> - Who can do the certification?
> - What must be done to become certified?
> - What hardwarety
On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 17:59 +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
*snip*
> If compiled with the hardened gcc profile, -fno-pie has to be specified
> when compiling the tests or it will fail. Specifying -fno-pie always
> will force me to disable any PIE support through configure as well.
>
> I tried to
76 matches
Mail list logo
