On 4/23/20 3:31 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2020, Kent Fredric wrote:
>
>> I've just discovered dev-perl/Ace has some fun questionable licensing
>> which includes a lovely indemnity clause, which had previously gone
>> unnoticed, and it stipulates additional requests for resear
> On Oct 23, 2019, at 7:48 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
> On 10/22/19 2:51 AM, Jaco Kroon wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>> On 2019/10/21 18:42, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>
>>> If we consider the access frequency, it might actually not be that
>
On 10/22/19 2:51 AM, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
> On 2019/10/21 18:42, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> If we consider the access frequency, it might actually not be that
>> bad. Consider a simple example with 500 files and two directory
>> buckets. If we ha
> On Oct 20, 2019, at 2:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2019-10-19 at 19:24 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
>>> On 10/18/2019 09:41, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Hi, everybody.
>>>
>>> It is my pleasure to announce that yesterday (EU) evening we've switched
>>> to a new distfile mirror layout.
> On Oct 19, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2019-10-19 at 15:26 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 9:10 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Oct 18, 2019, at 9:10 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 15:53 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>>&g
> On Oct 19, 2019, at 2:17 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 21:09 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 15:53 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>>&g
> On Oct 18, 2019, at 4:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 15:53 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>>> Hi, everybody.
>>>>> It is my pleasure to announce that yest
> On Oct 18, 2019, at 9:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Hi, everybody.
>
> It is my pleasure to announce that yesterday (EU) evening we've switched
> to a new distfile mirror layout. Users will be switching to the new
> layout either as they upgrade Portage to 2.3.77 or -- if they upgraded
>
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 12:09 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> TL;DR: I'd like to replace 'GPL-2' with 'GPL-2-only' etc., having
> the former trigger QA warning asking the dev to double-check if it's
> 'GPL-2-only' or 'GPL-2+'.
>
>
> GNU Licenses currently don't carry an upgrade clause -- i
> On Jan 27, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm going to keep this short. Gentoo/FreeBSD is on life support for
> quite some time already. The little work happening around it is all
> focused on amd64. I'm not aware of any developer running ~x86-fbsd
> at this point, a
> On Sep 17, 2018, at 12:40 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
> wrote:
>
> I'd prefer to wait another replies on the list for the main theme of this e-
> mail, but this problem also affects C (so, as **c**flags and C standards), so
> solution shoudn't be c++ specific, imho.
You would think that,
> On Sep 14, 2018, at 7:07 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 11:54:57 -0400
> Richard Yao wrote:
>
>>>> My read of this is that the warning occurs regardless of optimization
>>>> level, but it could somehow be improved by optimiza
> On Sep 14, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>
> On 15-09-2018 00:07:12 +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>>>
>>> Perhaps, if one persists on going this route, only do this for platforms
>>> that upstream supports, such that arches which will suffer from this
>>> (typically ppc, sparc, ...)
> On Sep 14, 2018, at 4:20 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
> On 09/14/2018 03:58 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>
>>> No one has answered the question: what do you do when a stable package
>>> breaks because of a new warning?
>>>
>>> .
> On Sep 14, 2018, at 3:29 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>
>> On 09/14/2018 01:52 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> Wouldn't the flip side of this be demonstrating that this has actually
>> caused issues? If following upstream discovers no bugs and also
>> causes no issues, why not leave it to mai
On 09/13/2018 07:36 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 12, 2018, at 6:55 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-09-12 16:50, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> There is also the case where we want these warnings to block
>>> installation, because t
On 09/13/2018 12:03 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 13-09-2018 07:36:09 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 12, 2018, at 6:55 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2018-09-12 16:50, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>> There is also the cas
On 09/14/2018 12:40 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:34 AM Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 12:44:38 +0300
>> Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
>>
>> I'm personally in favour of not allowing -Werror
>> to be in build system unconditionally.
>>
>> Maintainer is free to imp
> On Sep 13, 2018, at 8:54 PM, Georg Rudoy <0xd34df...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 14.09.2018 at 0:44 user Richard Yao wrote:
>> This is a really odd design decision by the GCC developers. With other
>> compilers, the separation between front end and backend is s
> On Sep 13, 2018, at 11:35 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:44 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On Sep 13, 2018, at 7:21 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:13 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>>>>
> On Sep 13, 2018, at 7:21 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:13 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On Sep 13, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 13-09-2018 07:36:09 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>>
>>&
> On Sep 13, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>
>> On 13-09-2018 07:36:09 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> On Sep 12, 2018, at 6:55 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2018-09-12 16:50, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2018, at 8:23 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
> wrote:
>
> Rich Freeman schrieb:
>>> Requirements:
>>>
>>> * Do not fail to build/install when a warning is encountered
>> On a particularly critical package like a filesystem, wouldn't we want
>> to still fail to install when a w
> On Sep 12, 2018, at 6:55 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
>
>> On 2018-09-12 16:50, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> There is also the case where we want these warnings to block
>> installation, because the risk of there being a problem is too great.
>
> I really disagree with that. So many devs have al
On Sep 12, 2018, at 4:28 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> If a package really ought to have
>> -Werror due to a very good reason and is properly maintained to support it,
>> then there is nothing wrong with inventing a USE flag to give users the
>> option of enforcing that.
>
> There is somet
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:48 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
>
>>> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:27 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 9/10/18 11:21 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>>>> On 9/10/18 11:19 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wr
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:27 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>
>> On 9/10/18 11:21 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>>> On 9/10/18 11:19 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
>>> It is indeed an insurmountable task to write code that is warning-free
>>> from the beginning across architectures
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 5:18 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
> wrote:
>
> Fabian Groffen schrieb:
>>> On 09-09-2018 11:22:41 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> -Werror has caught bugs that could have resulted in data loss in ZFS in the
>>> past thanks to it
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 4:59 PM, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
>
> Ühel kenal päeval, E, 10.09.2018 kell 22:56, kirjutas Kristian
> Fiskerstrand:
>>> On 9/10/18 10:51 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>>> Consider again the bug that started this. The maintainer had not
>>> built
>>> this configuration. None of the
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 10:19 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>
>> On 09-09-2018 11:22:41 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>> -Werror has caught bugs that could have resulted in data loss in ZFS in the
>> past thanks to it being built in userspace as part of zdb. So it is useful
&
> On Sep 9, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sep 9, 2018, at 12:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 2018-09-09 at 11:22 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>> On Sep 9, 2018, at 7:32 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>>>>
On Sep 9, 2018, at 12:32 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Sun, 09 Sep 2018, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
>> What I'm trying to do is to allow maintainers to keep -Werror if
>> they really want to do this, understand what they are doing and
>> have enough manpower to support this.
>
> Bug 665
> On Sep 9, 2018, at 12:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2018-09-09 at 11:22 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On Sep 9, 2018, at 7:32 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Our current -Werror policy demands unconditional re
> On Sep 9, 2018, at 12:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2018-09-09 at 11:22 -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On Sep 9, 2018, at 7:32 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Our current -Werror policy demands unconditional re
> On Sep 9, 2018, at 7:32 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Our current -Werror policy demands unconditional removal:
> https://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/common-mistakes/index.html#-werror-compiler-flag-not-removed
>
> I think this is wrong, see bugs 665464, 665538 for a rece
On 08/22/2018 08:26 AM, Ben Kohler wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> For some time now, we've been shipping broken i486 stage3s that do not
> run on pre-i686 hardware [1]. Due to a change in catalyst [2], we no
> longer set CXXFLAGS in the default make.conf, so the x86 profiles' (imho
> wrong/broken) default
> On Aug 9, 2018, at 4:27 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Hi, everyone.
>
> Just a short notice: we've enabled experimental support for 2-step
> authentication when logging in to woodpecker via SSH. For more details,
> see [1].
Awesome. I had no idea that the hooks for this were in place.
>
> TL
> On Aug 5, 2018, at 2:35 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 2:12 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>>
>> Prestige is good. We have prestige from our (myself and a few others) work
>> in upstream ZFS and Gentoo is well respected there.
>
> On Aug 5, 2018, at 1:24 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 1:01 PM Alec Warner wrote:
>>
>>
>> Part of my frustration is that seemingly "anything open source related
>> can be held in Gentoo" and I'm somewhat against that as I feel it
>> dilutes the Gentoo mission. We are
> On Aug 5, 2018, at 1:01 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 23, 2018, at 6:59 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018
> On Jun 23, 2018, at 9:05 AM, Jonas Stein wrote:
>
>> On 2018-06-23 04:57, Marty E. Plummer wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 09:50:50PM -0500, Marty E. Plummer wrote:
>>> So, as you may be aware I've been doing some work on moving bzip2 to an
>>> autotools based build. Recently I've ran int
> On Jun 23, 2018, at 6:59 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Marty E. Plummer
>> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 09:22:00AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > W dniu pią, 22.06.2018 o godzinie 21∶50 -0500, użytkownik Marty E.
>> > Plummer napisał:
>> > > So, as
I have opened a tracker bug for cross compilation issues:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/662714
Bugs on packages that fail to build with crossdev and patches for those
bugs are more than welcome. :)
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:24 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:11 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> Is it a violation of the FHS? /usr is for readonly data and the portage tree
>> is generally readonly, except when being updated. The same is true
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 6:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> W dniu śro, 11.07.2018 o godzinie 18∶11 -0400, użytkownik Richard Yao
> napisał:
>>>> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Y
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:34 PM Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> On my system, /usr/portage is a separate mountpoint. There is no need to
>> have on,h top level directories be separate mountpoints.
>
> It
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 4:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 04:25:20PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2018 03:29 AM, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
>>>> On 07/10/18 16:35, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>>>>> On 10/07/18 21:09, Willia
> On Jul 11, 2018, at 11:56 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:36 AM Raymond Jennings wrote:
>>
>> I do think it would be a wise idea to "grandfather" the current layout
>> for awhile.
>>
>
> I don't see why we would ever stop supporting it, at least in general.
> Mayb
On 07/11/2018 03:29 AM, Jory A. Pratt wrote:
> On 07/10/18 16:35, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> On 10/07/18 21:09, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 03:54:35PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
On 07/09/2018 03:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 09/07/18 23:12, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 07
> On Jul 5, 2018, at 4:53 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here's third version of the patches. I've incorporated the feedback
> so far and reordered the patches (again) to restore their
> degree-of-compatibility order. The full text is included below.
>
>
> Michał Górny (12):
> glep-
On 06/29/2018 11:43 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As suggested by Wojciech Myrda in bug 659486 [1], it would be helpful if
> sys-fs/e2fsprogs would use the linux-info eclass to warn if the kernel
> configuration doesn't include CONFIG_EXT4_FS_SECURITY=y when the user
> has expressed a desire to
> On Jun 28, 2018, at 8:46 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 28, 2018, at 5:15 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike)
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I just want to notify that an attacker has taken control of the Gentoo
>> organiz
> On Jun 28, 2018, at 5:15 PM, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike)
> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I just want to notify that an attacker has taken control of the Gentoo
> organization in Github and has among other things replaced the portage
> and musl-dev trees with malicious versions of the ebu
> On Jun 2, 2018, at 3:47 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> As a heads-up, glibc-2.26 just went stable on amd64.
>
> If you still have open bugs, they now mutate from "doesn't build with
> glibc-2.26" to "doesn't build, treecleaning candidate".
Not necessarily. If it builds on Gentoo FreeBS
> On Jun 1, 2018, at 2:58 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>
> x11@ is currently assigned or cc'd on 176 bugs. This number is down from
> 222 on April 1st and more than 412 in February 2015 (I reported this on
> #gentoo-desktop after closing out a bunch of bugs that day).
Awesome!
>
>
> == Fix x11-bas
> On May 22, 2018, at 4:35 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> W dniu sob, 19.05.2018 o godzinie 18∶53 +0300, użytkownik Consus
> napisał:
>> Okay, this
>>
>>https://github.com/mgorny/portage-mgorny/issues/15
>>
>> is a goddamn piece of sanity that Portage requires for a long time and
>> and it w
My past jobs have worn me out, which combined with upstream work, caused
me to become minimally active for some time. I am in the middle of some
changes to my life that will likely change that, but I don't use most of
the packages that I maintain anymore and they have gotten very little
attention s
>> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>>> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I
>>
On 04/06/2016 01:52 PM, NP-Hardass wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
> As of yesterday, GitHub now supports GPG signature verification [1].
> As a result, when viewed through the GitHub mirror, all commits now
> have a widget that displays whether the GPG signature has been
> verified (via GitHub). To he
On 04/06/2016 12:33 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 04/06/2016 12:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:06:35 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>>> That is unless you put per-system state in /usr/local, do symlinks to it
>>> in / and mount /usr/lo
On 04/06/2016 12:20 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:06:35 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>> That is unless you put per-system state in /usr/local, do symlinks to it
>> in / and mount /usr/local as part of system boot, which is the other way
>> of d
On 04/06/2016 12:06 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 04/06/2016 11:11 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 4:58:05 PM CEST, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>>> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I
>>> happen to have a few workstatio
On 04/06/2016 11:11 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 4:58:05 PM CEST, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I
>> happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share
>> presently,
>
>
> This is precise
On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I
> happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share
> presently, with some bodgery-workarounds I did pre the udev notification
> about initramfs's which I have
On 04/06/2016 01:34 AM, Duncan wrote:
> Richard Yao posted on Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:15:58 -0400 as excerpted:
>
>
>>> On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again,
> On Apr 6, 2016, at 3:42 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:15:58 AM CEST, Richard Yao wrote:
>>> On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> All,
>>> I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lo
> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:55 AM, James Le Cuirot wrote:
>
> On Wed, 06 Apr 2016 09:42:04 +0200
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
>>> This was invented in Solaris and copied by RHEL. The upgrade
>>> path for the /usr merge on those systems is a complete
>>> reinstall. Upgrading from RHEL6 to RHEL7 this
> On Apr 4, 2016, at 9:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lost
> track of the message where it was brought up, I would open a
> new thread to discuss it.
>
> When it came up before, some were saying that the /usr merge vi
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 03:34:07AM +1000, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> KDE team intends to stabilise Plasma 5 shortly, so please review the
> accompanying news items.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
> Title: KDE Plasma 5 Upgrade
> Author: Michael Palimaka
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Posted: 2
On 02/17/2016 02:01 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:18:46 -0500 Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>>
>>> The failure message comes from rc-mount.sh when the list of PIDs using a
>>> mountpoint includes "$$" which is shell shorthand f
On 02/17/2016 01:32 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>
>> Genkernel's initramfs generation was what we endorsed for the most
>> part, until dracut came around. it's hard to say what "most" are
>> doing but i expect dracut and genkernel based init
On 02/17/2016 12:19 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>> Systemd installs that go back into the initramfs at shutdown are rare
>> because there is a
>> hook for the initramfs to tell systemd that it should re-exec it and very
On 02/17/2016 01:47 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> This is something that I think many of us who had systems broken by
>> sys-fs/udev multiple times before sys-fs/eudev was an option thought was
>> obvious.
>
>
On 02/17/2016 11:16 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 14:38:05 +0100
> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
>
>> Michał Górny schrieb:
With the exception that Lennart Poettering is the lead developer of
systemd/udev, while such a thing cannot be said about you and eudev.
>>
ng order of default virtual/udev provider
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> eudev has every commit scrutinized by people who care about using it on
>> Gentoo. systemd-udev does not. Consequently, eudev has avoided the system
>&g
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 9:41 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 17, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Ben Kohler wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> eudev has every commit scrutinize
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 9:01 AM, Ben Kohler wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>>
>> eudev has every commit scrutinized by people who care about using it on
>> Gentoo. systemd-udev does not. Consequently, eude
> On Feb 16, 2016, at 9:20 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> William Hubbs posted on Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:41:29 -0600 as excerpted:
>
>> What I'm trying to figure out is, what to do about re-mounting file
>> systems read-only.
>>
>> How does systemd do this? I didn't find an equivale
> On Feb 16, 2016, at 3:18 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>
>> The failure message comes from rc-mount.sh when the list of PIDs using a
>> mountpoint includes "$$" which is shell shorthand for self. How can the
>> current shell claim to be u
> On Feb 16, 2016, at 1:41 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 01:22:13PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>>
>>> The reason it exists is very vague to me; I think it has something to do
>>> with claims of data loss in the
> On Feb 16, 2016, at 1:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I have a bug that points out a significant issue with
> /etc/init.d/mount-ro in OpenRC.
>
> Apparently, there are issues that cause it to not work properly for file
> systems which happen to be pre-mounted from an initramfs [1].
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 8:47 AM, Ben Kohler wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> I have no idea why we are even discussing the choice of default for
>> virtual/udev to have subdiscussions about kdbus. Practically ever
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 5:52 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:00:27 -0500
> Richard Yao wrote:
>
>>> On 02/08/2016 10:09 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Anthony G. Basile
>> wrote:
>>>>
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 7:58 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 07:53:22 -0500
> Richard Yao wrote:
>
>>> On Feb 17, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:41:33 +0100
>>> Chí-Thanh Christop
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 1:37 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 21:54:31 -0500
> Richard Yao wrote:
>
>>> On 02/08/2016 07:46 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 10:08:22 +0100
>>> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>>>
>
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 5:34 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Dnia 17 lutego 2016 05:00:27 CET, Richard Yao napisał(a):
>>> On 02/08/2016 10:09 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Anthony G. Basile
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 7:25 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Richard Yao wrote:
>>
>> If userbase is what matters to you, then OpenRC+eudev won. It is the
>> logical choice for those concerned about userbase because that is what
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:41:33 +0100
> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
>
>> Alexis Ballier schrieb:
> If it's just that, it's not limited to udev, but anything using
> kdbus/bus1, and would mean openrc/${favorite init system} wil
On 02/08/2016 10:09 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Anthony G. Basile
wrote:
>>
>> what does in-house tool mean? i'm a gentoo developer but i also work
>> on an upstream project (eudev) that 14 distros use.
>>
>> some of the criticism given here are my concerns as well a
On 02/08/2016 07:46 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 10:08:22 +0100
> Patrick Lauer wrote:
>
>> Ohey,
>>
>> I've opened a bug at:
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=573922
>>
>> The idea here is to change the order of the providers of virtual/udev.
>> For existing installs thi
On 02/08/2016 04:08 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> Ohey,
>
> I've opened a bug at:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=573922
>
> The idea here is to change the order of the providers of virtual/udev.
> For existing installs this has zero impact.
> For stage3 this would mean that eudev is pulle
Skip GPL-only symbols test when cross-compiling
Ned Bass (1):
Prevent SA length overflow
Olaf Faaland (1):
Remove "index" column from dbufstat.py
Richard Yao (5):
ClusterHQ Proposed API extensions
Only trigger SET_ERROR tracepoint event on error
Earlier this year, I spoke with Codeweavers' CEO, Jeremy White, about
changing their license terms so that we could remove RESTRICT=fetch from
app-emulation/crossover-bin. Robin Johnson and I also discussed it then.
The main issue was the requirement that users delete the software after
the trial
On 10/21/2015 04:55 AM, Kevin Zhao wrote:
> Hi Guys， We have finish compiling stage3 for ppc64 (little-endian).Here is
> the link:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2k84p6709AyTFlwLUF1WjlxUk0/view?usp=sharing
Awesome!
> Now we are going to build LiveCD using stage3. Could you help to give
I asked in #gentoo-embedded on freenode, but I would like to pose this question
to a wider auidence through the list.
What is the status of phone/tablet support? In specific, I am curious about:
* Modern hardware options (especially those without a hardware keyboard)
* Status of F/OSS drivers
* X
On 09/27/2014 07:39 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 09/27/14 18:46, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>>> What is really needed here is a vote by the Council on whether to add bc
>>> back to the stage3. If the people do insist, another vote regarding
>>>
On Thu 14 Aug 2014 12:04:10 PM EDT, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm going to add a new set of profiles under default linux. These
> will mirror what's already under hardened and will have the structure:
>
> default/linux/uclibc/{amd64,arm,mips,ppc,x86}
>
> Currently I maintain
Welcome back! :)
On 07/14/2014 04:26 AM, Justin (jlec) wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> we have an returning oldtimer here, Thomas Gall aka. tgall. His original
> bug has been opened in 2003, so he knows gentoo from the early days.
>
> He is joining the arm team now and will stabilize mostly for arm64,
On Sun 27 Apr 2014 08:40:08 PM EDT, "C. Bergström" wrote:
> In terms of general performance gains using LTO - The #1 candidate
> would be the linux kernel actually. See if anyone can get that to work ;)
Intel's Andi Kleen is working on it:
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1404.0/03450.ht
1 - 100 of 288 matches
Mail list logo
