On Thu, 29 May 2014 13:42:01 -0400
"Anthony G. Basile" wrote:
> Back in Jun 2012 I added a CURL_SSL to the USE_EXPAND to represent
You could start by fixing boring old bugs instead of working on
exciting new features. See bug 510580, née 499398, which stops everyone
from stabilising because you
On 05/29/14 23:21, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
Sorry for the possible HTML email, this is from my phone..
On May 29, 2014, at 10:20 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
Anthony G. Basile posted on Thu, 29 May 2014 13:42:01 -0400 as excerpted:
With the number of ssl providers growing, like l
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30/05/14 08:03 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 05/29/14 23:21, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> USE_EXPAND generally works or is meant to work when all
>> participating ebuilds are ok with working from the exact same set
>> of flags.
>
> Not at all.
I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails, pings,
... to genkernel repository for:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
I'll p.mask it on amd64 profiles if noone replies soon :(
- Samuli
On Fri, 30 May 2014 18:10:40 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails, pings,
> ... to genkernel repository for:
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
>
> I'll p.mask it on amd64 profiles if noone replies soon :(
>
> - Samuli
>
On 30/05/14 19:10, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 18:10:40 +0300
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>> I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails, pings,
>> ... to genkernel repository for:
>>
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
>>
>> I'll p.mask it on amd64 pr
On 30/05/14 19:16, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 30/05/14 19:10, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 May 2014 18:10:40 +0300
>> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>
>>> I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails, pings,
>>> ... to genkernel repository for:
>>>
>>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show
Tom Wijsman:
>
> Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
>
That's nonsense. The amount of wrong lines doesn't matter. A single
wrong line in the kernel can break your whole system as well.
Please p.mask (or patch) immediately. There is no point in waiting.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30/05/14 18:10, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
So if an ebuild does "rm -rf / --no-preserve-root", it should not be
masked as long as it does not break the command into several lines?
- --
Alexander
berna..
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/30/2014 11:10 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails, pings,
> ... to genkernel repository for:
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
>
> I'll p.mask it on amd64 profiles if noon
On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:26:38 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> I'll give it 48 hours and then p.mask it.
Genkernel itself does work; so, there is no point to masking it.
> I won't be fixing it.
Someone else here can, but wait for someone like Pacho to look into the
activity of the current maintai
В Fri, 30 May 2014 18:10:40 +0300
Samuli Suominen пишет:
> I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails, pings,
> ... to genkernel repository for:
>
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
>
> I'll p.mask it on amd64 profiles if noone replies soon :(
>
> - Samuli
>
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:50 AM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:26:38 +0300
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> > I'll give it 48 hours and then p.mask it.
>
> Genkernel itself does work; so, there is no point to masking it.
>
> I like the message the package.mask would send to maintainer
On Fri, 30 May 2014 16:34:09 +
hasufell wrote:
> Tom Wijsman:
> >
> > Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
> >
>
> That's nonsense. The amount of wrong lines doesn't matter. A single
> wrong line in the kernel can break your whole system as well.
>
> Please p.mask (or patch)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 30 May 2014 18:43:14 +0200
Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 30/05/14 18:10, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
> So if an ebuild does "rm -rf / --no-preserve-root", [...]
Does Genkernel do that? Please sta
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30/05/14 19:11, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Well, let's just mask the whole tree; there are wrong lines
> everywhere.
It is not a matter of quantity but severity.
$ echo "Dnoe"
$ rm -rf / --no-preserve-root
Same quantity, somewhat different severity.
On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:11:54 +0200
Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Well, let's just mask the whole tree; there are wrong lines
> everywhere.
A more reasonable approach would be for the Council to permit the tree
to contain at most 6 wrong lines at any given time. That way any
developer wishing to add a new
On Fri, 30 May 2014 20:51:09 +0400
Alexander Tsoy wrote:
> В Fri, 30 May 2014 18:10:40 +0300
> Samuli Suominen пишет:
>
> > I can't find anyone with access that actually replies to mails,
> > pings, ... to genkernel repository for:
> >
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
> >
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:14:42 +0200
Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 30/05/14 19:11, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > Well, let's just mask the whole tree; there are wrong lines
> > everywhere.
> It is not a matter of quantity but severity.
>
> $ echo "Dnoe"
>
On Fri, 30 May 2014 18:14:11 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:11:54 +0200
> A more reasonable approach would be for the Council to permit the tree
> to contain at most 6 wrong lines at any given time. That way any
> developer wishing to add a new wrong line must previously fi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30/05/14 01:14 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:11:54 +0200 Tom Wijsman
> wrote:
>> Well, let's just mask the whole tree; there are wrong lines
>> everywhere.
>
> A more reasonable approach would be for the Council to permit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 30/05/14 19:18, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> Well, this thread's problem is not severe at all; thus, no need to
> mask.
I disagree. I'm with ssuominen. Do with that information what you will...
- --
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.ne
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:26:38 +0300
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
>> I have no plans in inserting my name to genkernel's ChangeLog,
>> and I've done my best to contact people (nobody cares)
>>
>> Only initramfs tool I care and can warmly recommen
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Ben Kohler wrote:
> As nice at it sounds to just DROP these configs, that option is not really
> feasible considering the way we currently use genkernel in our handbook.
> Relying on the kernel's own defconfig, "genkernel all" will NOT produce the
> same mostly-usa
configs should have never gotten into genkernel in the first place.
it's each kernel pkg (or even version) that owns a valid config of
itself.
I am part of genkernel@ but I have no will nor time to fix it. And
when I have, I'd rather work on genkernel-next, that comes with a much
more readable init
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/30/2014 01:39 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> configs should have never gotten into genkernel in the first place.
> it's each kernel pkg (or even version) that owns a valid config of
> itself.
> I am part of genkernel@ but I have no will nor time to
On Fri, 30 May 2014 13:32:54 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Ben Kohler wrote:
> > As nice at it sounds to just DROP these configs, that option is not
> > really feasible considering the way we currently use genkernel in
> > our handbook. Relying on the kernel's own
On Fri, 30 May 2014 13:22:54 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> While all this bickering is nice to read, what is really needed is:
>
> 1. Somebody needs to step up and actually fix genkernel.
And that's why we await the maintainers' or undertakers' response. With
undertakers, I mean the type of "up
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>
> Good idea, we really could use some kind of kernel seeds in the Portage
> tree; if someone is willing to maintain them, knowing that Pappy has
> maintained them for years and spoke about it it seems like hard work.
>
> Remember that these "k
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:21:20 +0200
Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 30/05/14 19:18, Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > Well, this thread's problem is not severe at all; thus, no need to
> > mask.
> I disagree. I'm with ssuominen. Do with that information what you
On Fri, 30 May 2014 13:08:50 -0500
Ben Kohler wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Tom Wijsman
> wrote:
> >
> > Good idea, we really could use some kind of kernel seeds in the
> > Portage tree; if someone is willing to maintain them, knowing that
> > Pappy has maintained them for years and
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 04:34:09PM +, hasufell wrote:
> Tom Wijsman:
> >
> > Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
> >
>
> That's nonsense. The amount of wrong lines doesn't matter. A single
> wrong line in the kernel can break your whole system as well.
>
> Please p.mask (or patch)
Sven Vermeulen:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 04:34:09PM +, hasufell wrote:
>> Tom Wijsman:
>>>
>>> Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
>>>
>>
>> That's nonsense. The amount of wrong lines doesn't matter. A single
>> wrong line in the kernel can break your whole system as well.
>>
>>
Am Freitag, 30. Mai 2014, 19:14:11 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
> On Fri, 30 May 2014 19:11:54 +0200
>
> Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > Well, let's just mask the whole tree; there are wrong lines
> > everywhere.
>
> A more reasonable approach would be for the Council to permit the tree
> to contain at most
On Fri May 30 22:30:32 2014 Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 04:34:09PM +, hasufell wrote:
> > Tom Wijsman:
> > >
> > > Please no p.mask for a single line being wrong...
> > >
> >
> > That's nonsense. The amount of wrong lines doesn't matter. A single
> > wrong line in the ke
On 05/28/2014 09:32 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:28 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> Indeed. I only use a subset of the dev-tools packages so those that I
>> don't use will be unmaintained in practice. I will add something to the
>> Staffing Needs wiki page but feel free to
Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> If a user has i.e. SSL="polarssl" in make.conf and emerges things that
> don't have polarssl on their list, then those things won't have SSL
> support at all, right?
Wrong; I would expect emerge to throw an error at me and exit, rather
than to fail (build the package with
Peter Stuge:
> Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> If a user has i.e. SSL="polarssl" in make.conf and emerges things that
>> don't have polarssl on their list, then those things won't have SSL
>> support at all, right?
>
> Wrong; I would expect emerge to throw an error at me and exit, rather
> than to fail
On Fri, May 30, 2014, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> On 05/30/2014 11:10 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461828
> >
> > I'll p.mask it on amd64 profiles if noone replies soon :(
> >
>
> Please don't p.mask a working program because a config file is wrong
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 09:57:01AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>
> On 27/05/14 08:34, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Dnia 2014-05-26, o godz. 23:15:34
> > Samuli Suominen napisał(a):
> >
> >> UPower upstream removed sys-power/pm-utils support from 0.99 release
> >> (currently unkeyworded in tree), as
On Tue, 27 May 2014 09:02:37 +0200
""Paweł Hajdan, Jr."" wrote:
> It's more of a project-internal decision IMHO, but just wanted to get
> feedback from the larger community.
>
> Currently 11 out of 27 bugs assigned to chromium.g.o are related to test
> failures.
>
> I don't remember a single ca
41 matches
Mail list logo
