Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Tue, 13 Jun 2006 03:27:28 +0200:
> Alec Warner wrote:
>>
>> I prefer gentoo-x86, although others hate that x86-centric moniker ;)
>>
>>
> ebuilds' tree could be ok (now after the transgender cow Larry we greet
> the
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 12:00:43AM +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> My current idea is to draw up a formal specification of what ebuilds
> are allowed to do, and what to assume about the environment in which
> they run, as well as defining the formats of everything under
> profiles/, metadata.xml fi
[snip - Mike, Robin, Joerg, Alec and Marius were kind enough to answer my
questions...]
Thanks guys!
That should shave a couple of hours off each nightly backup.. :-))
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 20:14:02 -0400
Daniel Ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thing I do ask...Lets all start now getting used to calling the
> "portage tree" something different. I'm all for terms like "the tree" or
> "the ebuild tree" or "the package tree" but at this point, given the
> prom
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 13:38 +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote:
> On related note, why "virtual/portage" ? Why not "virtual/packagemanager", or
> something like that?
Because it already exists and is the least intrusive change. bug #69208
--
Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Linux
--
gentoo-dev@gen
Stephen Bennett wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 19:04:39 -0400
> Luis Francisco Araujo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> I like the idea. This would be some kind of portage-tree standard?
>>
>
> This would be, in essence, a formal definition of the layout of the
> tree, and the format of and a
Hi
Follow-up question to the backup thingy.
Is there an easy way to share Portage's database between multiple
virtual machines?
Optimally, I would emerge --sync and the results would land in a
filesystem that I'd share between VMs, so I don't have to do emerge
--sync in each and all of them. T
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 22:36 +0200, Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Hi
>
> Portage takes up a lot of space and time when doing server backups.
>
> How much of Portage needs to be backup up?
> Any large parts of the tree that I can just dump?
You don't need to backup any of it. Everything under /usr/por
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 21:58 +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> Comments?
Please postpone any such changes, if approved, until at least July, as
we will be doing a snapshot before then, and I would prefer not having
to spend our entire release cycle just fixing possible problems from
these changes.
-
Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Hi
>
> Follow-up question to the backup thingy.
>
> Is there an easy way to share Portage's database between multiple
> virtual machines?
>
unionfs is your friend =)
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.or
Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Hi
>
> Follow-up question to the backup thingy.
>
> Is there an easy way to share Portage's database between multiple
> virtual machines?
>
> Optimally, I would emerge --sync and the results would land in a
> filesystem that I'd share between VMs, so I don't have to do emer
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 14:15 -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 09:58:01PM +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> > Many things were discussed in the last round of this thread (Paludis
> > and Profiles, in case anyone missed it), and many useful points raised.
> > One of these, which see
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 20:14 -0400, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> One thing I do ask...Lets all start now getting used to calling the
> "portage tree" something different. I'm all for terms like "the tree" or
> "the ebuild tree" or "the package tree" but at this point, given the
> prompting subject matter,
Is app-text/texlive usable for now? I only have a basic tetex installation that
I will need for my master grade at university and I would want to make the
switch to texlive really fast! Maybe I can help?
Thanks
Gabriel Lavoie
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 15:31 +0200, Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Hi
>
> Follow-up question to the backup thingy.
>
> Is there an easy way to share Portage's database between multiple
> virtual machines?
>
> Optimally, I would emerge --sync and the results would land in a
> filesystem that I'd share b
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:42:16 -0400
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please postpone any such changes, if approved, until at least July, as
> we will be doing a snapshot before then, and I would prefer not having
> to spend our entire release cycle just fixing possible problems from
>
Gabriel Lavoie wrote:
> Is app-text/texlive usable for now? I only have a basic tetex installation
> that
> I will need for my master grade at university and I would want to make the
> switch to texlive really fast! Maybe I can help?
No it is not usable right now, hence the mask :-)
The biggest p
I suppose for now that the best way to check the texmf tree dependencies is to
install TeX Live using the .iso file?
Gabriel
Martin Ehmsen a écrit :
> Gabriel Lavoie wrote:
>> Is app-text/texlive usable for now? I only have a basic tetex installation
>> that
>> I will need for my master grade at
Gabriel Lavoie wrote:
> I suppose for now that the best way to check the texmf tree dependencies is to
> install TeX Live using the .iso file?
I'm not sure I understand your question...
The tex packages that should go into the three trees is not necessarily
the packages that ships with texlive (th
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:02:59 -0400
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You want the tree to
> be writable, too, so that you can sync from any machine and also because
> of distfiles.
Or you can put distfiles dir outside of portage by adjusting the $DISTDIR
variable in make.conf.
--
An
On Monday 12 June 2006 12:57, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Monday 12 June 2006 12:42, Peter wrote:
> > All of a sudden, emerge -uD --newuse world is showing dozens of ebuild
> > that are replaced due to removed use flags. Did someone change the
> > default use flags? Upgraded yesterday to portage
Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that
we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of
just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an
expectation that it would add to developer workloads. The former is
certainly a rea
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 11:10 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that
> we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of
> just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an
> expectation that it
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:10:47AM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that
> we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of
> just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an
> expectation
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:08:03 +0200, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Monday 12 June 2006 12:57, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
>> On Monday 12 June 2006 12:42, Peter wrote:
>> > All of a sudden, emerge -uD --newuse world is showing dozens of ebuild
>> > that are replaced due to removed use flags. Did som
Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> As I've said all along - I do not have any problems with Project
> Sunrise. I have a problem with it being an official project hosted on
> *.gentoo.org, as I fear most users will think "hey, it's official,
> it's hosted on *.gentoo.org - it can't be that bad". Judging
Jonathan Adamczewski wrote:
Molle Bestefich wrote:
Hi
Follow-up question to the backup thingy.
Is there an easy way to share Portage's database between multiple
virtual machines?
Optimally, I would emerge --sync and the results would land in a
filesystem that I'd share between VMs, so I don'
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 10:06:56AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Do you also expect that once I'm able to move my overlay to
> overlays.g.o, it will become this amazing beautiful thing that never has
> any work-in-progress stuff in it that's incredibly broken? (I would love
> if that were the cas
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:06:56 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
>> As I've said all along - I do not have any problems with Project
>> Sunrise. I have a problem with it being an official project hosted on
>> *.gentoo.org, as I fear most users will think "hey, it's official
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 01:29:55PM -0400, Peter wrote:
[snip]
> This kernel source will not cause Armageddon to arrive, cause smoke to
> issue from your power supply, nor interfere with other ebuilds.
That's funny. Did you just claim that a sys-kernel/*-sources ebuild
with the patch-sets listed b
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:54:47 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 01:29:55PM -0400, Peter wrote: [snip]
>> This kernel source will not cause Armageddon to arrive, cause smoke to
>> issue from your power supply, nor interfere with other ebuilds.
>
> That's funny. Did you ju
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 18:26 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> I have a problem with it being an official project hosted on
> *.gentoo.org, as I fear most users will think "hey, it's official,
> it's hosted on *.gentoo.org - it can't be that bad". Judging from the
> few users who have posted to
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:14:24PM -0400, Peter wrote:
> I did. Sources don't affect anything. The ck-sources are in the tree, and
> there is dire warning associated with them. Only the -mm sources have any
> sort of warning. If a user CHOOSES to use a hacked up kernel, then they
> obviously choose
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:15:12PM -0400, Ned Ludd wrote:
> Would moving it from overlays.g.o to overlays.dev.g.o,
> overlays.experimental.dev.g.o help ? It could then be viewed
> officially unofficial as the tinderboxing repository's I've
> been working on.
It wouldn't be the ideal solution to
> Would moving it from overlays.g.o to overlays.dev.g.o,
> overlays.experimental.dev.g.o help ? It could then be viewed
> officially unofficial as the tinderboxing repository's I've
> been working on.
I think it won't make a big difference. It's stated clearly that the sunrise
overlay is experimen
Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: [Tue Jun 13 2006, 01:30:27PM CDT]
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:14:24PM -0400, Peter wrote:
> > I did. Sources don't affect anything. The ck-sources are in the tree, and
> > there is dire warning associated with them. Only the -mm sources have any
> > sort of warning. If
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 11:10 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that
> we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of
> just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an
> expectation that it
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 13:29 -0400, Peter wrote:
> As an example, there is a kernel source build I've been playing with. I
> know, from the kernel team, it will never, repeat NEVER, get onto the
> portage tree. they want no part of it. However, the bug is widely
> followed, and if Sunrise were to be
Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that
> we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of
> just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an
> expectation that it would add to developer workloads.
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 01:41:21PM -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Care to elaborate? The wise, all-knowing Zen argument isn't
> particularly helpful
All software runs on top of the core of the operating system, the
kernel. If the kernel is buggy it will be reflected in all the
software runnin
> (...) Is it just that now we have a lot of
> developers who are willing to allow users to break their boxes?
Just tell me one thing, are you breaking your box everytime you use an
overlay?
--
Best Regards,
Peper
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 18:26 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
>
>> I have a problem with it being an official project hosted on
>> *.gentoo.org, as I fear most users will think "hey, it's official,
>> it's hosted on *.gentoo.org - it can't be that bad". Judging from the
>> few
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Using your example, if it will *never* make it into the tree, then what
> is it doing on *.gentoo.org infrastructure?
OK, I'll speak up. I plan on using overlay.gentoo.org for the perl team
overlay repository. dev-perl alone
Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: [Tue Jun 13 2006, 01:52:18PM CDT]
> All software runs on top of the core of the operating system, the
> kernel. If the kernel is buggy it will be reflected in all the
> software running on top of it, be it portage, compilers, daemons or
> graphical user environments.
Oh
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:41:21 -0500 Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: [Tue Jun 13 2006, 01:30:27PM CDT]
| > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:14:24PM -0400, Peter wrote:
| > > I did. Sources don't affect anything. The ck-sources are in the
| > > tree, and there is dire
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:17:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | Care to elaborate? The wise, all-knowing Zen argument isn't |
> particularly helpful
>
> It's perfect proof that there are users that are utterly clueless about
> what is best for their system, and utterly clueless about how using
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:30:27 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 02:14:24PM -0400, Peter wrote:
>> I did. Sources don't affect anything. The ck-sources are in the tree,
> and
>> there is dire warning associated with them. Only the -mm sources have
>
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 04:17:57PM -0400, Peter wrote:
> It's no such proof. Anyone who rolls a kernel, takes the time to learn
> what it entails, understands what he/she is intending to do, knows the
> ramifications of those actions. Gentoo users, in particular, by virtue of
> the fact that this i
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 15:14 -0400, Michael Cummings wrote:
> Just my two cents. Not sure about sunrise, but I'm all behind the overlays.
*sigh*
I have *never* argued that teams should not be able to run their own
project-specific overlays. You are the perl team. You are more than
welcome to run
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Cummings wrote:
| Chris Gianelloni wrote:
|>> Using your example, if it will *never* make it into the tree, then what
|>> is it doing on *.gentoo.org infrastructure?
|
| OK, I'll speak up. I plan on using overlay.gentoo.org for the perl team
|
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Chris,
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
| What we *are* arguing against is having something in a
| non-project-specific overlay, that is not maintained by the project in
| question, and has *specifically* been rejected by the project in
| question. This s
On 16:17 Tue 13 Jun , Peter wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:17:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > | Care to elaborate? The wise, all-knowing Zen argument isn't |
> > particularly helpful
> >
> > It's perfect proof that there are users that are utterly clueless about
> > what is best for
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:19:51 +0100
Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Michael Cummings wrote:
> | Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> |>> Using your example, if it will *never* make it into the tree,
> then what |>> is it doing on *.gentoo.org in
53 matches
Mail list logo
