On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:20:13 -0400
Richard Yao wrote:
> An often cited benefit of the /usr merge is the ability to put
> everything but /etc on NFS and for that reason, we need to force an
> initramfs on people happily using /usr without it.
Are you going to send a single mail for every single b
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 23:54:16 -0400
Richard Yao wrote:
> On 07/17/2012 07:07 PM, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 18:41 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> If somebody really is pushing for an all-out /usr move by all means
> >> speak up, but I think that basically what everybody is advo
On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:20:13 -0400
Richard Yao wrote:
> Dear Everyone,
>
> An often cited benefit of the /usr merge is the ability to put
> everything but /etc on NFS and for that reason, we need to force an
> initramfs on people happily using /usr without it.
You forgot about /var. And possibl
Michał Górny posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:18:49 +0200 as excerpted:
> Didn't you see Lennart's opinions on Gentoo Linux? I don't think their
> refusal needed to be expressed at all.
I don't believe I did. Link?
(FWIW I expect I'll eventually switch to systemd, but there's no hurry,
and IMO it
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:49:24 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Michał Górny posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:18:49 +0200 as excerpted:
>
> > Didn't you see Lennart's opinions on Gentoo Linux? I don't think
> > their refusal needed to be expressed at all.
>
> I don't believe I did.
Michał Górny posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:55:32 +0200 as excerpted:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:49:24 + (UTC)
> Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Michał Górny posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:18:49 +0200 as excerpted:
>>
>> > Didn't you see Lennart's opinions on Gentoo Linux? I don't thin
On 07/18/2012 04:10 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 23:54:16 -0400
> Richard Yao wrote:
>
>> On 07/17/2012 07:07 PM, Olivier Crête wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 18:41 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
If somebody really is pushing for an all-out /usr move by all means
speak up
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 04:10 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Jul 2012 23:54:16 -0400
>> Richard Yao wrote:
[snip]
>>> The difference is simple. You put stuff into /sbin when you do not
>>> want regular users to be able to select it via tab comp
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:12:09PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:19:48PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> >
> > Looking at @system and what it typically pulls into @world, the only
> > thing that might cause a problem is udev, although virtual/dev-manager
> > is in @system, ra
"epatch" is so widely used and basic that I wonder why it's still not
implemented as a real helper function.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:33 PM, hasufell wrote:
> "epatch" is so widely used and basic that I wonder why it's still not
> implemented as a real helper function.
>
Because then its harder to change, it must be in PMS, otherwise you
have to do things like test which version of epatch the package
m
> Why should we care about ancient filesystems that didn't supported
> long paths, and therefore we got stuck with /usr since we didn't
> wanted to waste another *single* character to make it /user?
Because of it's original name: "UNIX System Resources" (usr).
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:33 PM, hasufell wrote:
> > "epatch" is so widely used and basic that I wonder why it's still not
> > implemented as a real helper function.
>
> Because then its harder to change, it must be in PMS, otherwise you
> have to do things like test which version of epatch the
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 08:13:51PM +0400, Hobbit wrote:
> > Why should we care about ancient filesystems that didn't supported
> > long paths, and therefore we got stuck with /usr since we didn't
> > wanted to waste another *single* character to make it /user?
>
> Because of it's original name: "U
All,
i'm not using rabbitmq-server except as a dependency for
app-admin/chef and i've no interest or time to fix it. Feel free to
take it.
Regards,
Bene
On 11:26 Wed 18 Jul , William Hubbs wrote:
> Actually this is not correct (see my earlier post with the link to
> osnews.com).
Indeed. My bad.
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:18:35 +0200
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:33 PM, hasufell
> > wrote:
> > > "epatch" is so widely used and basic that I wonder why it's still
> > > not implemented as a real helper function.
> >
> > Because then its harder to change, it must be i
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Hobbit wrote:
>> Why should we care about ancient filesystems that didn't supported
>> long paths, and therefore we got stuck with /usr since we didn't
>> wanted to waste another *single* character to make it /user?
>
> Because of it's original name: "UNIX System
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:35:58 -0500
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> All the arguments for keeping /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, and /usr/sbin
> separated are really instances of the Chewbacca defense [1]. They just
> don't make any sense.
All the arguments for changing things are just realising that the hor
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Olivier Crête wrote:
> Also be ready for a merge of /bin and /sbin.. I'm sure most people can't
> even explain the difference between them.
Whoa hey what why? Who's pushing this forward?
Our current policy [1] requires that ebuilds must assign the seven
variables DESCRIPTION, HOMEPAGE, SRC_URI, LICENSE, SLOT, KEYWORDS, and
IUSE, even if their value is empty.
Could we drop this requirement? Repoman already enforces that
DESCRIPTION, HOMEPAGE, LICENSE, SLOT, and KEYWORDS are non-emp
Many eclasses (eutils being the most prominent example) contain:
DESCRIPTION="Based on the ${ECLASS} eclass"
Is this of any use?
Ulrich
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:40:12 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:35:58 -0500
> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> > All the arguments for keeping /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, and /usr/sbin
> > separated are really instances of the Chewbacca defense [1]. They
> > just don't make any sense.
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:53:37PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Our current policy [1] requires that ebuilds must assign the seven
> variables DESCRIPTION, HOMEPAGE, SRC_URI, LICENSE, SLOT, KEYWORDS, and
> IUSE, even if their value is empty.
>
> Could we drop this requirement? Repoman already en
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> But it must be clear that all the rationale behind
> said division was invented after the fact,
I would say that the rationale was not “invented”, but rather adapted
to an evolving system.
> and (as Rob Landley said in
> his email [2]
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 07:53:37PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Our current policy [1] requires that ebuilds must assign the seven
>> variables DESCRIPTION, HOMEPAGE, SRC_URI, LICENSE, SLOT, KEYWORDS, and
>> IUSE, even if their value i
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> I don't mind the merge of /bin, /usr/bin, /sbin and /usr/sbin;
> moreover, I want an even more radical change:
>
> /usr -> /System
> /home -> /Users
> /etc -> /Config
This would be a terrible idea, IMO. If you can rationalize this, wh
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:56:56 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Many eclasses (eutils being the most prominent example) contain:
> DESCRIPTION="Based on the ${ECLASS} eclass"
>
> Is this of any use?
The reason that sort of thing is there is because in the olden days
before we had specs or EAPIs or an
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
>
> 3. More support for mdev; e.g. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev and
> (still in beta) https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev/Automount_USB The
> next challenge is "custom mdev rules", which should be do-able.
Interesting. Can you talk m
On 18-07-2012 14:11:07 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> Worse, I think /home to /Users is an *egregiously* poor choice; any
> native English speaker who has rudimenatry (or even intimate)
> knowledge of how things previously worked would be very likely to
> confuse /Users with the historical /usr.
You
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:40:12 +0100
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:35:58 -0500
>> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> > All the arguments for keeping /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, and /usr/sbin
>> > separated are really instances of
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:35:02 -0400
"Walter Dnes" wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:12:09PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 07:19:48PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> > >
> > > Looking at @system and what it typically pulls into @world, the
> > > only thing that might cause a
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:40:12 +0100
>> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:35:58 -0500
>>> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>>> > All the arguments for keeping /bin, /sbin, /u
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
[snip]
>> To me, it looks a lot like what once was / is now expected to be an
>> initramfs, which I find extraordinarily problematic, for the following
>> reasons:
>>
>> 1) There are no tru
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
[snip]
>> Debian uses initramfs-tools...
>
> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
The kernel you are running (if yo
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
We don't even update kernels as part of the regular update process,
let alone initramfs systems.
In general you update them togeth
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Debian uses initramfs-tools...
>>
>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>> Gento
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
>
> We don't even update kernels as part of the regular update process,
>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
>> [snip]
Debian uses initramfs-tools...
>>>
>>> AFAIK, neither g
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:12:14 -0400
Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Mol
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner
> >> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>> Debian uses initramfs-tools...
> >>
>
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
>>
>> We don't e
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
All,
I have received a request to allow OpenRC's init scripts to take command
line arguments [1]. As noted on the bug, there are some advantages to
this, but implementing it would have to break backward compatibility,
for example:
/etc/init.d/foo stop start
would no longer work the way you might
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to
William Hubbs wrote:
> /etc/init.d/foo stop start
>
> would no longer work the way you might expect because there would be no
> way to tell whether start is a command or an argument to stop.
>
> What are your thoughts about this change?
/etc/init.d/foo stop start
along with all other commands c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/07/12 03:47 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Michael Mol
>> wrote:
>>
>> The real benefit is that it allows you to mount any partition, if
>> the tools
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/07/12 03:49 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> William Hubbs wrote:
>> /etc/init.d/foo stop start
>>
>> would no longer work the way you might expect because there would
>> be no way to tell whether start is a command or an argument to
>> stop.
>>
>> W
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 18/07/12 03:47 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Michael Mol
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The real
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> William Hubbs wrote:
>> /etc/init.d/foo stop start
>>
>> would no longer work the way you might expect because there would be no
>> way to tell whether start is a command or an argument to stop.
>>
>> What are your thoughts about this change?
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/07/12 03:55 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Ian Stakenvicius
> wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
>>
>> On 18/07/12 03:47 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Canek Peláe
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> So your initramfs doesn't include network tools such as ping,
> traceroute or wget. Fine. Fundamentally speaking, why shouldn't
> someone else's?
So, an initramfs is just a piece of kernel functionality. You can do
almost ANYTHING in an initr
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
>
> We don't even update kernels as part of the regular update process,
>
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:58:18 -0400
Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > William Hubbs wrote:
> >> /etc/init.d/foo stop start
> >>
> >> would no longer work the way you might expect because there would
> >> be no way to tell whether start is a command or an
On 18-07-2012 15:58:18 -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> > along with all other commands can work like before.
> >
> > /etc/init.d/foo stop -- start
> >
> > can pass start as an argument to the stop command.
>
> I like this approach, because its use of -- continues expected
> commandline parsing behavio
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 14:41:52 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> I have received a request to allow OpenRC's init scripts to take
> command line arguments [1]. As noted on the bug, there are some
> advantages to this, but implementing it would have to break backward
> compatibility, for example:
>
> /e
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 03:58:18PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > William Hubbs wrote:
> >> /etc/init.d/foo stop start
> >>
> >> would no longer work the way you might expect because there would be no
> >> way to tell whether start is a command
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/07/12 04:05 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> [...] However lets say I have coreutils in / and coreutils in my
> initramfs. I upgrade coreutils from v1 to v2. Are you saying that
> you are too afraid to update coreutils in / and then also update it
> in
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> So your initramfs doesn't include network tools such as ping,
>> traceroute or wget. Fine. Fundamentally speaking, why shouldn't
>> someone else's?
>
> So, an initramfs is just a piece of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 18/07/12 04:09 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> The other approach, which is on the bug, still has this issue,
> e.g.
>
> /etc/init.d/foo command1 arg1 arg2 command2 arg3 arg4 command3
> arg5
>
> gets pretty ugly pretty quick. which arguments go wi
Folks,
let's move all of the discussion of this to the bug if possible so that
it is all in one place.
Thanks,
William
pgpw1garAIRzQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Rich Freeman wrote:
> 5. When something goes wrong you can get a dash/bash shell
..
> useful even if you don't have firefox+X11 in your initramfs.
This is one of the first videographed use cases for coreboot.
The initramfs in the video[1] admittedly does not have a browser.
Those days, boot fla
Is obsolete and not used anymore[1][2]. Will be removed in 30 days.
+ 18 Jul 2012; Johannes Huber tetex-3.eclass, tetex.eclass:
+ Marking as DEAD for removal.
+
[1] http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/eapi-per-eclass/tetex-3.eclass/
[2] http://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/eapi-per-eclass/tetex
William Hubbs wrote:
> let's move all of the discussion of this to the bug if possible so
> that it is all in one place.
That's fine and probably good.
Note that you were the one inviting email discussion about the
change. I guess you wanted rather to focus on the question if
breaking compatibili
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:03:14 +0200
Peter Stuge wrote:
> William Hubbs wrote:
> > let's move all of the discussion of this to the bug if possible so
> > that it is all in one place.
>
> That's fine and probably good.
>
> Note that you were the one inviting email discussion about the
> change. I
In the beginning there were root (/bin) and /usr programs
See UNIX Programmer's Manual (Thompson, Ritchie, November
1971). [http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/manintro.pdf]
/usr programs were "not considered part of the UNIX system"
[bottom of page ii].
Root (/) contained all the system file
> It would be nice if a sensible structure could be proposed and
> agreed by ALL Linux distributions (coordinated with BSD).
>
+1
If a new file system standard is required, my preferences based on a
history of what is worked and changed over the last 20-30 years would
be:
- OK with requiring / a
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 08:06:41PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> >
> > 3. More support for mdev; e.g. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev and
> > (still in beta) https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev/Automount_USB The
> > next challenge is "c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18-07-2012 21:09, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 23:03:14 +0200 Peter Stuge
> wrote:
>
>> William Hubbs wrote:
>>> let's move all of the discussion of this to the bug if possible
>>> so that it is all in one place.
>>
>> That's fine an
On 07/19/12 03:05, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
> We don't even update kernels as part of the regular update process,
> let alone initram
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 08:27:29PM +0200, Micha?? G??rny wrote
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:35:02 -0400
> "Walter Dnes" wrote:
>
> > 3. More support for mdev; e.g. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev
> > and (still in beta) https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev/Automount_USB
> > The next challenge is "c
On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 18:24 -0700, Matthew Marlowe wrote:
> > It would be nice if a sensible structure could be proposed and
> > agreed by ALL Linux distributions (coordinated with BSD).
> >
>
> +1
>
> If a new file system standard is required, my preferences based on a
> history of what is worke
Canek Peláez Valdés posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:04:33 -0500 as
excerpted:
> I don't mind the merge of /bin, /usr/bin, /sbin and /usr/sbin; moreover,
> I want an even more radical change:
>
> /usr -> /System /home -> /Users /etc -> /Config
Ugh. At least kill the shift key requirement. Other t
Jason A. Donenfeld posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:47:49 +0200 as excerpted:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Olivier Crête
> wrote:
>> Also be ready for a merge of /bin and /sbin.. I'm sure most people
>> can't even explain the difference between them.
>
> Whoa hey what why? Who's pushing this
Fabian Groffen posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:07:50 +0200 as excerpted:
> Perhaps, one better makes it explicit, inspired by gdb
>
> /etc/init.d/foo stop --args aggressive-kill=yes (and when using --args,
> I'd probably disallow using multiple commands to keep it clear what's
> going on)
++
This
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 18:24 -0700, Matthew Marlowe wrote:
>
>> - It would be nice if the rootfs used a snapshot based filesystem and
>> if the bootloader was intelligent enough to easily allow admins to
>> boot to older snapshots as an expect
Michael Mol posted on Wed, 18 Jul 2012 15:18:35 -0400 as excerpted:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
>>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
Today I would like to present to you my proposal for a new eclass with
helper functions for treating localizations: l10n.eclass (see the
attached file or [1]). Its functionality can be used in other eclasses
(such as qt4-r2 and cmake-utils) as well as directly in ebuilds.
In order to keep the code
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> Many eclasses (eutils being the most prominent example) contain:
>> DESCRIPTION="Based on the ${ECLASS} eclass"
>>
>> Is this of any use?
> The reason that sort of thing is there is because in the olden days
> before we had specs or EAPIs or a
78 matches
Mail list logo
