On 01/23/2014 04:48 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-01-23, o godz. 11:36:06
> Chris Reffett napisał(a):
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 01/23/2014 11:28 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Dnia 2014-01-23, o godz. 11:24:41 Chris Reffett
>>> napisał(a):
>>>
After s
Dnia 2014-01-25, o godz. 10:12:26
Markos Chandras napisał(a):
> On 01/23/2014 04:48 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2014-01-23, o godz. 11:36:06
> > Chris Reffett napisał(a):
> >
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> On 01/23/2014 11:28 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/25/2014 05:12 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 01/23/2014 04:48 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Dnia 2014-01-23, o godz. 11:36:06 Chris Reffett
>> napisał(a):
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 01/23/2014 11:28 AM, Micha
On 01/25/2014 01:09 PM, Chris Reffett wrote:
> On 01/25/2014 05:12 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 01/23/2014 04:48 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Dnia 2014-01-23, o godz. 11:36:06 Chris Reffett
>>> napisał(a):
>>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On 01/23/2014 11:28 AM,
On 01/22/2014 06:58 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 20 January 2014 12:26:13 William Hubbs wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in the one
>>> place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
>>
On 11/10/2013 06:12 AM, Johann Schmitz wrote:
> - gpg control packet
>>> I already have too many packages to take care of but my company
>>> is using nagion on Gentoo so I take care of it. Although I
>>> wouldn't mind if somebody else helps with the packages as well.
>
> We use Nagios on many serv
It seems having XDG variables like XDG_CONFIG_HOME set in the
environment when calling emerge has a tendency to cause sandbox
violations. For example, see the bugs blocking bug 499202.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=499202
If you grep for XDG_CONFIG_HOME in the eclass directory, you can
On 1/25/2014 9:24 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 11/10/2013 06:12 AM, Johann Schmitz wrote:
>> - gpg control packet
I already have too many packages to take care of but my company
is using nagion on Gentoo so I take care of it. Although I
wouldn't mind if somebody else helps with th
I don't know of any reason they are exported, but I could be wrong.
I'm going to run the modified eclass for some time.
rm unnecessary export wrt #467374
--- eclass/games.eclass
+++ eclass/games.eclass
@@ -19,20 +19,20 @@
*) die "no support for EAPI=${EAPI} yet" ;;
esac
-export GAMES_PREFIX=
On 01/25/2014 09:24 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> (picking a random email from the thread)
>
> ping again. 3 months later, the list of bugs remain the same. Shall we
> consider dropping it to maintainer-needed?
>
These are easy fixes, some for nagios-plugins:
* https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug
El sáb, 25-01-2014 a las 11:13 -0500, Mike Gilbert escribió:
> It seems having XDG variables like XDG_CONFIG_HOME set in the
> environment when calling emerge has a tendency to cause sandbox
> violations. For example, see the bugs blocking bug 499202.
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49
Dnia 2014-01-25, o godz. 11:13:38
Mike Gilbert napisał(a):
> It seems having XDG variables like XDG_CONFIG_HOME set in the
> environment when calling emerge has a tendency to cause sandbox
> violations. For example, see the bugs blocking bug 499202.
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2014-01-25, o godz. 11:13:38
> Mike Gilbert napisał(a):
>
>> It seems having XDG variables like XDG_CONFIG_HOME set in the
>> environment when calling emerge has a tendency to cause sandbox
>> violations. For example, see the bugs blocki
On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Dnia 2014-01-25, o godz. 11:13:38
>> Mike Gilbert napisał(a):
>>
>>> It seems having XDG variables like XDG_CONFIG_HOME set in the
>>> environment when calling emerge has a tendency to
Duncan wrote:
> My point being... yes indeed, there's a LOT of folks for whom gentoo
> without a stable tree would be a gentoo freed of a to-them useless
> weight, allowing gentoo to move even faster, and be even better in areas
> that are already its strength, heavily automated leading edge rel
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> I've often wondered just how much faster gentoo could move, and how much
> better we could keep up with upstream, if we weren't so focused on 30+day
> outdated stab?l3 bumping all the time. All that effort... from my
> viewpo
On 01/25/2014 12:22 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
> On 1/25/2014 9:24 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 11/10/2013 06:12 AM, Johann Schmitz wrote:
>>> - gpg control packet
> I already have too many packages to take care of but my company
> is using nagion on Gentoo so I take care of it. Althoug
Rich Freeman wrote:
> It seems like the simplest solution in these cases is to just have
> them focus on @system packages for the stable tree, and let users
> deal with more breakage outside of that set
Why not make stable completely optional for arch teams?
//Peter
18 matches
Mail list logo
