As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages.
We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
(eselect itself would stay in app-admin).
Opinions?
Ulrich
Hi Duncan,
I don't see the connection between the email Fabio wrote and your
answer. Do you want to say, that you agree that he's doing what i
described and that it works the way i described it? I doubt it. If you
really care, could you answer my first email and state there the
problems you see wi
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 11:54 +0200, Philipp Riegger wrote:
> The current situation:
>
> Binary packages are (usually) stored
> in /usr/portage/packages/$category/$package-$version.tbz2. The package
> consists of the "real binary package" and the metadata (combined using
> xpak or whatever).
No, t
osm2mp was a tool needed for conversion of openstreetmap maps into an
intermediate format, which could be used for further conversion into garmin
maps with mkgmap.
Latest versions of mkgmap accept osm files as an input, osm2mp is not
maintained and imho not of any use nowadays, so I'll remove i
So, "::" vs "@" apart, is it something that is worth looking and implementing
in future EAPIs?
--
Fabio Erculiani
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Philipp Riegger posted
1243321504.9661.14.ca...@hspc30.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de, excerpted
below, on Tue, 26 May 2009 09:05:03 +0200:
> I don't see the connection between the email Fabio wrote and your
> answer. Do you want to say, that you agree that he's doing what i
> described and that it
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Philipp Riegger wrote:
Hi Duncan,
And all this layer thing Fabio was talking about. I did not try it and I
did not read the code, but I think it makes things much more
complicated. See also the discussion about mixing package managers
between Gentoo and Sabay
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 11:27 +0200, lx...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Philipp Riegger
> wrote:
> > And all this layer thing Fabio was talking about. I did not try it and I
> > did not read the code, but I think it makes things much more
> > complicated. See also the
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 08:48 +, Duncan wrote:
> Philipp Riegger posted
> 1243321504.9661.14.ca...@hspc30.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de, excerpted
> below, on Tue, 26 May 2009 09:05:03 +0200:
>
> > I don't see the connection between the email Fabio wrote and your
> > answer. Do you want to say,
On Tue, 26 May 2009 10:13:51 +0200 (CEST)
lx...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
> So, "::" vs "@" apart, is it something that is worth looking and
> implementing in future EAPIs?
Isn't it just a user issue, not one we want used anywhere where EAPI
rules are in effect?
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Philipp Riegger posted
1243335643.9661.46.ca...@hspc30.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de, excerpted
below, on Tue, 26 May 2009 13:00:43 +0200:
> Bit it seems to be quite an uninteresting topic, since the people most
> affected by it (Gentoo developers) did not join the conversation, yet.
> Maybe I sho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
# Federico Ferri (26 May 2008)
# Deprecated cause depending on unmaintained dev-tcltk/otcl.
# Everything being moved to 'abandonware' overlay.
# Possible replacement: net-misc/gns3 (sunrise overlay)
# Going for removal in ~30 days if no one objects.
#
Duncan wrote:
> Tobias Klausmann posted
>> I was under the impression that it's illegal to change/set the EAPI
>> after using inherit.
>
> The short answer, based on my understanding of posts to this point, would
> be that it's illegal for Gentoo (in-tree, council decided), but not
> necessarily
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 16 May 2009 00:28:36 +0530
> Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> As I've stated a long time ago, I'm for this solution. My
>> understanding is that there are 2 objections to this:
>
> 3) It doesn't solve the problem. It doesn't allow things like version
> format extensions.
Hello,
the Security Team would like to create a new DTD for our GLSAs. GLSAs
are distributed via our web site and the tree. Their format is defined
by a DTD.
When the format was initially defined in 2004, some use cases were
considered that never got implemented or used. Other use cases only
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 09:04 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
> As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages.
> We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
> (eselect itself would stay in app-admin).
>
> Opinions?
Yes in general. Maybe think about what happens when th
On Tue, May 26, 2009 4:49 pm, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 16:19 +0200 schrieb Robert Buchholz:
[...]
>> (+) SLOT support. An implied attribute 'slot' to the 'vulnerable'
>> and 'unaffected' tag will be introduced. This limits the scope of
>> the range specifiers to
On Tuesday 26 May 2009, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 16:19 +0200 schrieb Robert Buchholz:
> > I would like to announce the changes we want to introduce. If you
> > have any feedback, please speak up. This can include feature
> > requests.
>
> Maybe add a 'tag' attribute to t
On 26-05-2009 09:04:46 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages.
> We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
> (eselect itself would stay in app-admin).
>
> Opinions?
I hate package moves, so is it really *really* necessary?
--
Fab
On Tuesday 26 May 2009 18:31:17 AllenJB wrote:
> Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 26-05-2009 09:04:46 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages.
> >> We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
> >> (eselect itself would stay in app-admin).
Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 26-05-2009 09:04:46 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages.
We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
(eselect itself would stay in app-admin).
Opinions?
I hate package moves, so is it really *really* nece
Hello world!
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 16:24 +0200, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 09:04 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
> > As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages.
> > We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
> > (eselect itself would stay in app
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Philipp Riegger wrote:
> Hello world!
>
> On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 16:24 +0200, Tiziano Müller wrote:
>> Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 09:04 +0200 schrieb Ulrich Mueller:
>>> As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages. We could move the
>>> 27 eselect-*
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 16:19 +0200 schrieb Robert Buchholz:
> Hello,
>
> the Security Team would like to create a new DTD for our GLSAs. GLSAs
> are distributed via our web site and the tree. Their format is defined
> by a DTD.
>
> When the format was initially defined in 2004, some use c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
AllenJB wrote:
> Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> On 26-05-2009 09:04:46 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>> As of today, app-admin contains 179 packages. We could move the
>>> 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category (eselect
>>> itself would stay in
> On Tue, 26 May 2009, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category
>> (eselect itself would stay in app-admin).
> I hate package moves, so is it really *really* necessary?
Of course it is not necessary, only a matter of organisation (as most
lx...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Philipp Riegger
> wrote:
>> See also the discussion about mixing package managers
>> between Gentoo and Sabayon. I do not want these problems.
>
> incorrect. Give it a spin ;)
> Problems we have were *only* related to Portage world
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Tue, 26 May 2009 10:13:51 +0200 (CEST)
> lx...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
>> So, "::" vs "@" apart, is it something that is worth looking and
>> implementing in future EAPIs?
>
> Isn't it just a user issue, not one we want used anywhere whe
Tuesday, 26. May 2009, Federico Ferri Ви написали:
> seems like here two-level categories are a limitation.
>
> if three-level categories were available, I'd say app-admin-xselect.
Argh, should we suffer the same issues over again? What about just dropping
the two/three/etc tier requirement and ju
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
lx...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Philipp Riegger
wrote:
See also the discussion about mixing package managers
between Gentoo and Sabayon. I do not want these problems.
incorrect. Give it a spin ;)
Problems
090526 Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> We could move the 27 eselect-* packages to a new app-eselect category;
> eselect itself would stay in app-admin.
>> I hate package moves, so is it really *really* necessary?
> Of course it is only a matter of organisation (as most package moves are).
> Since there's a
This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
irc.freenode.net) !
If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo
Hello,
I am the student doing the Universal Select Tool for this year's
Geetoo's SoC.
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 16:35 +0200, Philipp Riegger wrote:
>
> How will that tool be called? Maybe uselect?
Everything points out to that until now. =)
The way it's done, current eselect modules can continue
Hanno Böck wrote:
> osm2mp was a tool needed for conversion of openstreetmap maps into an
> intermediate format, which could be used for further conversion into garmin
> maps with mkgmap.
>
> Latest versions of mkgmap accept osm files as an input, osm2mp is not
> maintained and imho not of any
Federico Ferri wrote:
> # Federico Ferri (26 May 2008)
> # Deprecated cause depending on unmaintained dev-tcltk/otcl.
> # Everything being moved to 'abandonware' overlay.
> # Possible replacement: net-misc/gns3 (sunrise overlay)
> # Going for removal in ~30 days if no one objects.
> # removal bug
lx...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
> So, "::" vs "@" apart, is it something that is worth looking and
> implementing in future EAPIs?
>
I don't see the main tree referring to other repositories any time soon
so this is not a pressing issue. But as said earlier this makes sense
for /etc/portage stuff s
2009/5/27 Sérgio Almeida :
> this time (SoC starts in a few hours) the prototype is written in
> python, does everything eselect does and supports any scripting language
> for module's actions. Oh, it's extremely faster too.
You have a working prototype right now? Awesome! Where's the ebuild for i
Am Montag, den 04.05.2009, 22:01 +0100 schrieb Sérgio Almeida:
> Gentoo Dev's,
>
> My name is Sérgio Almeida, I am Portuguese and I am a student for this
> year's Google SoC coding the Universal Select Tool project for Gentoo
> being Sébastien Fabbro (bicatali) my mentor.
>
> Abstract:
>
> Unive
On Wed, 2009-05-27 at 01:19 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> 2009/5/27 Sérgio Almeida :
> > this time (SoC starts in a few hours) the prototype is written in
> > python, does everything eselect does and supports any scripting language
> > for module's actions. Oh, it's extremely faster too.
>
> Yo
On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 22:04 +0200, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Montag, den 04.05.2009, 22:01 +0100 schrieb Sérgio Almeida:
> > Gentoo Dev's,
> >
> > My name is Sérgio Almeida, I am Portuguese and I am a student for this
> > year's Google SoC coding the Universal Select Tool project for Gentoo
> > b
For the record: Fabio (lxnay) and I had a chat on IRC and cleared some
things up. He also reproduced the problem I had encountered with mixed
portage/entropy usage, and concluded that it was a bug in entropy. I'm
glad we got to a constructive point. So things turn out not to be as bad
as I was init
Le 26/05/2009 22:43, Sérgio Almeida a écrit :
Hello,
There isn't yet. The code is still pretty ugly and I'm still refactoring
to the new architecture before I can make it public (or even officially
git it). I will post it on this mailing list as soon as experimentations
are possible.
Please do
AllenJB wrote:
> I'd favor tags over increasing the category
> levels, tho I'm not convinced either is necessary at the current time
> (tho tags might make searching easier, in some ways).
Heck yes! Tags are a good idea. The idea's been raised on -dev a few
times. I suppose they're not (yet) essen
Am Dienstag, den 26.05.2009, 17:00 -0700 schrieb Josh Saddler:
> AllenJB wrote:
> > I'd favor tags over increasing the category
> > levels, tho I'm not convinced either is necessary at the current time
> > (tho tags might make searching easier, in some ways).
>
> Heck yes! Tags are a good idea. Th
44 matches
Mail list logo
