[gentoo-dev] Removed app-cdr/cdrecord-provdvd and app-cdr/dvdrtools

2006-12-03 Thread Lars Weiler
Both were masked since 08 Jul 2006. The code of app-cdr/cdrecord-prodvd is now included in app-cdr/cdrtools or app-cdr/cdrkit. app-cdr/dvdrtools are dead upstream and not needed any more, as the other previously mentioned applications are capable of writing DVDs. Regards, Lars -- Lars Weiler

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Sunday 03 December 2006 01:00, Alec Warner wrote: > Recently commited to svn (but afaik released only in ~arch) is code to > prevent the sourcing of ebuilds with no manifest. Thus ebuilds you > randomly download off of bugzilla need to get a lookover from you and > then ebuild foo.ebuild digest

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Ned Ludd
On Sun, 2006-12-03 at 14:33 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Sunday 03 December 2006 01:00, Alec Warner wrote: > > Recently commited to svn (but afaik released only in ~arch) is code to > > prevent the sourcing of ebuilds with no manifest. Thus ebuilds you > > randomly download off of bugzilla ne

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Alec Warner
Mike Frysinger wrote: On Sunday 03 December 2006 01:00, Alec Warner wrote: Recently commited to svn (but afaik released only in ~arch) is code to prevent the sourcing of ebuilds with no manifest. Thus ebuilds you randomly download off of bugzilla need to get a lookover from you and then ebuild

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 01:00:24 -0500 Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This 'feature' is currently controlled via strict, so those that hate > hate hate it can turn it off via FEATURES="-strict" It seems that now I have to run repoman with FEATURES=-strict after I do as little as change a k

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 01:00:24 -0500 > Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> This 'feature' is currently controlled via strict, so those that hate >> hate hate it can turn it off via FEATURES="-strict" > > It seems that n

[gentoo-dev] Update from User Relations wrt User Representatives.

2006-12-03 Thread Christel Dahlskjaer
As of Friday 17th November, George Prowse, known to most as cokehabit, has left the Gentoo User Relations project and his position as User Representative. Regrettably, as things turned out, he did not fit the role as well as many had hoped, and it was decided that it would be in everyone's best int

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Jeroen Roovers
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 15:03:27 -0800 Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Apparently `repoman fix` doesn't currently work for that particular > case, which is definitely a bug. If you can simply run `repoman > fix`, will that be convenient enough? I would like to be able to run `repoman full` w

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Alec Warner
Jeroen Roovers wrote: On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 15:03:27 -0800 Zac Medico <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Apparently `repoman fix` doesn't currently work for that particular case, which is definitely a bug. If you can simply run `repoman fix`, will that be convenient enough? I would like to be able to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Daniel Drake
Alec Warner wrote: This is to prevent people from sticking a random unchecksum'd ebuild in your tree and then having portage source it for depend() metadata and then getting bitten by some global scope nasties. Is this really the correct solution to this "problem"? I can't see the use case: d

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage feature addition

2006-12-03 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Drake wrote: > Alec Warner wrote: >> This is to prevent people from sticking a random unchecksum'd ebuild >> in your tree and then having portage source it for depend() metadata >> and then getting bitten by some global scope nasties. > > Is th

[gentoo-dev] Southern California Linux Expo 5x Opens Registration

2006-12-03 Thread Gareth J. Greenaway
Effective immediately, registration for SCALE 5X is available at http://www.socallinuxexpo.org/order. The Early bird ticket price is $60 for full admission with a $30 admission for students with valid ID. Gentoo developers can use the GNTOO promotional code for a 40% discount on the full access pas

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Versioning the tree

2006-12-03 Thread Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen
On Friday 01 December 2006 13:47, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > Actually, we would have to review the process, since not everything that > gets a security bug ends up with a GLSA. My current loose rule is that > if it deserves a GLSA, then it deserves and update, but I don't know the > exact criteria

Re: [gentoo-dev] treecleaner maskings

2006-12-03 Thread David Shakaryan
Christian Heim wrote: > #72585 - x11-wm/qvwm > o requested by Jakub Moc on behalf of treecleaner > o nothing depends on it > o Pending Removal Dec 04th 2006 Although the treecleaners project has been suspended, I have, as a member of the desktop-wm herd, removed this package. -- David Shakar