On Friday 07 July 2006 13:22, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Friday 07 July 2006 17:31, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > As I pointed out on irc (to clarify), its still an issue even with
> > gcc-3.4.6. Its just well enough filtered, and as Mike pointed out, they
> > 'fixed' it in 3.4.5 via spec
On Friday 07 July 2006 12:53, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 04:00:09PM +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> > If you take out the stub patches (which incidentally have no impact on
> > code generation), many builds will simply fail because they expect the
> > additional flags from ssp,
On Friday 07 July 2006 01:46, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 07:44:34PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 July 2006 16:14, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> > > Gentoo's gcc with the vanilla flag isn't the official GCC. Most patches
> > >
On Friday 07 July 2006 12:18, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 16:20:08 +0200 Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | I suggest to add a "CPUFLAGS" USE_EXPAND variable to the tree.
> | This should be set to sane defaults in the profiles. I.e. for x86,
> | it should not set CPUFLAGS at all,
On Friday 07 July 2006 17:53, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 05:12:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 07 July 2006 01:46, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 07:44:34PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 06 J
On Friday 07 July 2006 18:15, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 18:06:24 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | > The issue with this is that $feature on amd64 is not exactly the
> | > same as $feature on x86. Would a better name be ${ARCH}_FEATURES or
>
On Friday 07 July 2006 19:04, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> I hope this is specific enough: toolchain.eclass revision 1.234
> (separating ssp/... from vanilla) log message:
> "ssp/pie/htb have their own USE flags sep from vanilla, so people can
> utilize those"
> when in fact the old USE=vanilla behavio
On Saturday 08 July 2006 02:20, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> I also mentioned it in a bugzilla comment, though admittedly not as a
> question there. (The gcc 2 bug, I think.) Bugzilla comments are safe to
> assume read, right?
the gcc2 bug has a lot of things in there i need to review/merge so it's in
On Monday 03 July 2006 15:41, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> Even if they have changed their minds about this, I think it is too
> early to re-evaluate the project for inclusion.
so are you going to offer up some of your complaints so they can be
addressed ? the sunrise guys have pretty clearly s
On Saturday 01 July 2006 03:34, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the
> 2nd Thursday once a month), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
we're pushing this to the 3rd due to it being a better time for some
On Friday 07 July 2006 19:43, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 18:36:00 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | > | > It'd also make handling use masking much easier.
> | > |
> | > | why ? because there wouldnt be anything to mask ?
> | >
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 09:37, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On 7/11/06, Gustavo Felisberto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm removing net-misc/ssh from the tree as Tectia no longer provides a
> > "free" version of they're ssh client and server. The last update to this
> > package was one year and half
On Monday 10 July 2006 14:38, Joshua Jackson wrote:
> So who's planning on going? Basically I'd like to know who's planning
> on going. I'm still undecided about it honestly, and if I go it'd only
> be for a few days. Its also probably a good way to find a roomate to
> make the cost of rooms a bit
On Thursday 13 July 2006 20:13, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
> Actually, as of 2.10, gtk+ CAN be built without X and using the
> framebuffer, so you can build gtk+ apps against the framebuffer (using
> them, is another story... although I hear GIMP works) so having it
> there isn't necessarily useles
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 20:26, Daniel Black wrote:
> there is always,
not for joe blow who just wants to use Gentoo, the implementation details of
portage be damned
-mike
pgp52zW9PEvg6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 18:12, John Myers wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 July 2006 14:36, Steve Dibb wrote:
> > Well, it could happen while testing an ebuild. :) I'd be pretty ticked
> > if I were testing Qt and I didn't realize they did change the doc files
> > around before doing a test run.
> >
> >
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 13:37, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> SpanKY complained that he cannot set a custom die message then. But this is
> not needed here, since every do* command can be clearly identified by the
> argument and the directory it will be installed to.
except for the times where the do
On Saturday 15 July 2006 13:41, Ned Ludd wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-07-15 at 17:45 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> > The local root exploit-of-the-week would have been unable to run if our
> > users systems had /proc mounted with nosuid and/or noexec
> >
> > It would be worthwhile considering making this a
On Friday 14 July 2006 11:09, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Friday 14 July 2006 16:43, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > While it is a "working" solution, it isn't necessarily a sensible one.
>
> You can take over xine-lib and fix it however you prefer.
>
> As this, as well as any other idea you
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 21:54, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> can someone remind me why our arch USE flags are in an "opt-out" system
> rather than "opt-in" ?
patch attached ... no complaints, i'll merge it in a day or two :p
-mike
pgpkf9VkbsyOW.pgp
Description: P
On Saturday 08 July 2006 11:58, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Jul 2006 11:50:47 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | and i was saying in the namespaced solution you wouldnt need to
> | use.mask things because $ARCH_CPU_FEATURES would be set by users in
> | the make.c
On Monday 17 July 2006 11:14, Aron Griffis wrote:
> Vapier wrote: [Thu Jul 13 2006, 11:32:39PM EDT]
>
> > On Wednesday 12 July 2006 13:37, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > > SpanKY complained that he cannot set a custom die message then. But
> > > this is not needed here, since every do* command can be
On Saturday 15 July 2006 23:37, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 04 July 2006 21:54, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > can someone remind me why our arch USE flags are in an "opt-out" system
> > rather than "opt-in" ?
>
> patch attached ... no complaints, i
On Wednesday 19 July 2006 17:26, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Curtis Napier wrote:
> > viewcvs.gentoo.org is no more. It has been migrated to
> > sources.gentoo.org and the links on the website have been updated.
> >
> > Thanks neysx and ramereth.
>
> Just to clarify...
>
> viewcvs.g.o will still work,
thanks to solar and yoswink we have a xml version now:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~vapier/council-2006-nominees.xml
for you peeps who have yet to speak up at all, please do so in the next week,
or i'll start hunting you down when i get back from China :)
-mike
pgpdvKQjYIPWR.pgp
Description: PGP sign
On Thursday 20 July 2006 02:22, Tuan Van wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > thanks to solar and yoswink we have a xml version now:
> > http://dev.gentoo.org/~vapier/council-2006-nominees.xml
>
> please update above link for rl03 and wolf31o2 ( unless he has changed
> his m
On Thursday 20 July 2006 17:17, Joshua Nichols wrote:
> Could I get notice of whether or not your architecture is supporting
> Java?
in Gentoo or in general ? in general, kaffe should support pretty much all
our arches, but in Gentoo, i dont have time to get it working for:
arm
m68k
s390
sh
-mik
On Friday 28 July 2006 06:02, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:35:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > Mike asked you repeatedly to voice your issues or concerns in relation
> > to Project Sunrise, which you failed to reply to.
>
> How many times are we supposed to raise
On Thursday 27 July 2006 18:21, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Looking at the meeting log, the
> council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed
no, we noted that people claimed they had concerns but when cornered and asked
what exactly their concerns were, no more responses were to be ha
On Monday 24 July 2006 20:28, Peper wrote:
> Comments are welcome again :]
what ebuilds would this actually be useful in ? looking through the code
largely gives me the impression of over engineering and not much else
-mike
pgpdWFj2i5blA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday 30 July 2006 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Personally I'd expect the council to block the thing permanently.
hard to address any sort of concerns here, so i guess i'll just regurgitate
the council log to you
it's hard for users to get involved in our development process ... i imagine
On Sunday 30 July 2006 18:47, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> There is nothing you or anyone else can say
well if you're coming forth with such stout resolution of ignoring any one
else's input, then there's no point in debating the topic with you now is
there ?
-mike
pgpRLmOrTjAue.pgp
Description:
On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.
load up your browser and check out how many bugs are assigned
to '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
opening a bug, putting together an ebuild/pa
On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
> | kill it, no big
On Sunday 30 July 2006 23:32, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> - first for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially anybody to
> submit almost anything with no QA.
no, read the FAQ
http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#Howareyouensuringthatthereisnob0rken/maliciuscodegettingintoth
On Monday 31 July 2006 01:53, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:38:42 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | Please note the difference between pulling and pushing. Pushing
> | implies that people who don't want sunrise on their systems have to
> | have it and have to use it.
On Monday 31 July 2006 02:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I don't have a perfect solution, no. Unfortunately, knowing why one
> thing won't work doesn't automatically let you know what will.
and knowing what does/doesnt work comes a lot from experience, not solely
making conjectures about how we thi
i'm tired of looking at this package, anyone care about this thing enough to
be its maintainer ?
-mike
pgpKcazDf3HyB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the
2nd Thursday once a month), 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 dev
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 10:21, Roy Marples wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:09, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Perhaps because other options exist? I'd have suggested WIRELESS_DEVICES
> > (or even ETHERNET_DEVICES or NET_DEVICES) instead, which would work for
> > your case and also be applic
On Thursday 03 August 2006 01:44, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 07:07:35AM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Repost from gentoo-portage-dev[1]:
> >
> > Was just brought to my attention that the =* operator doesn't work as I
> > thought, as for example =foo-1.2* matches foo-1.20 as we
On Thursday 03 August 2006 22:43, Daniel Black wrote:
> app-arch/sharutils
not such a big deal as base-system is the fall back
-mike
pgpFMHbv297Me.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Saturday 05 August 2006 09:29, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> P.S. Note that we have offered various portage devs hardware and/or an
> account on Iluxa's ginormous Origin 2000 machine in the past with the
> intention of getting this fixed, and nobody has taken us up on that...
so ? none of the por
On Saturday 05 August 2006 06:57, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Aug 2006 11:49:53 +0200
> Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Please re-read the list of packages that fail tests:
> > * glibc
> > * autoconf
> > * gettext
> > * tar
> > That makes _4_ system packages. Before I would c
On Saturday 05 August 2006 10:12, Christian Heim wrote:
> I went looking for the reason, looked into the eutils, multilib and finally
> autotools eclasses and saw that the autotools.eclass is setting the DEPEND
> but not the RDEPEND. IIRC portage-2.1 is now setting RDEPEND to DEPEND if
> nothing ot
On Saturday 05 August 2006 14:56, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> The metadata for sandbox suggests that it is under the control of the
> portage team, even if they lack a herd:
... because it is tightly integrated with portage ... there is the aspects of
portage which require some sandbox env setup/e
On Saturday 05 August 2006 14:48, Harald van Dijk wrote:
> Then RESTRICT=test, or use a src_test which warns on test failures
> rather than aborting, could be used. Or am I missing something?
some architectures pass fine
my [hidden] point was that globally enabling/disabling FEATURES=test isnt a
On Saturday 05 August 2006 15:32, Zac Medico wrote:
> The actual fault is in libpng-1.2.12-r1.ebuild where RDEPEND="" should be
> explicitly set.
the actual fault is portage
instead of half-assing all this DEPEND/RDEPEND garbage, why not fix portage to
do it consistently
either it implicitly se
On Saturday 05 August 2006 16:07, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Of course I know this, and it sucks. If sandbox is so tightly
> integrated with portage, then why *isn't* there a portage team member
> who works on sandbox?
because portage requires deep knowledge in python/bash
sandbox requires deep
not sure the impact of this, but i just finished fixing three packages with
this issue, and the problem arises due to "system" packages being updated ...
a recent upgrade with gettext causes some packages to fail with errors like:
/bin/sh: @MKINSTALLDIRS@: No such file or directory
if you hit th
On Saturday 05 August 2006 17:29, Zac Medico wrote:
> I'm not satisfied with the current implicit RDEPEND behavior either. I
> propose that we make repoman force explicit definition of RDEPEND.
and i'm on the opposite side where implicit RDEPEND should be clean:
- eclass and ebuilds have their ow
On Monday 07 August 2006 13:36, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Sunday 06 August 2006 00:26, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > and i'm on the opposite side where implicit RDEPEND should be clean:
>
> Why? I for one consider explicit dependencies much more clean.
i prefer to make the
On Monday 07 August 2006 21:44, W.Kenworthy wrote:
> My personal opinion is that whilst things like modular X are good for
> developers, they are not so good for users - particularly gentoo users.
we provide meta packages (X/kde/gnome/etc...) for the split packages so users
can just emerge 1 pack
someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure directory tree
rooted in /emul
if we moved these things to the standard lib32 dirs, it would certainly ease
the pain of people doing multilib building
-mike
pgp0iUxwqWpVd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
why god why do we have this file ? it pollutes ld.so.conf and makes me so
angry
-mike
pgpOFUoFK4Ze9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
looks like your mail server ate this ...
someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure directory tree
rooted in /emul
if we moved these things to the standard lib32 dirs, it would certainly ease
the pain of people doing multilib building, both in and out of portage
it'd also
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 16:28, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> hmm, what do you do if there's a need for arch specific defaults ?
not accounted for as we really havent found this to be a big deal
> IMHO its better to have these defaults somewhere within the profile.
> Maybe another package.use alike fi
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 15:18, Zac Medico wrote:
> Stuart Herbert wrote:
> > Any chance of per-package USE defaults support? That's much more useful
> > to me.
>
> Attached to bug 61732 there's a patch that implements this via a new
> IUSE_DEFAULTS ebuild variable. If people like that particula
On Tuesday 08 August 2006 19:46, Jason Wever wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:57:44 +0100
> "Stuart Herbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As a package maintainer, I'm happy :) Is this going to cause problems
> > for arch teams at all?
>
> I hope not. I've been looking forward to this for arch spe
On Wednesday 09 August 2006 10:57, Duncan wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
> > looks like your mail server ate this ...
> >
> > someone remind me why our emul packages install in some obscure
> > directory tree rooted in /emul
> >
>
as the subject says, i'd like to move gen_usr_ldscript() to
toolchain-funcs.elcass ... the reason for this is that i have an improvement
to the function which will start writing OUTPUT_FORMAT() to ldscripts, but
this requires $(tc-getCC)
motivation: better multilib handling :)
speak now before
On Thursday 10 August 2006 15:42, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:26:10 -0500
>
> Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > Olivier Crete wrote:
> > > It makes sense that you wouldn't want these bin
On Thursday 10 August 2006 11:57, Grant Goodyear wrote:
> Well, we don't yet have reliable software in place to _count_ votes,
> but that's no reason not to start collecting them.
once we've settled, it'd be good to upload the scripts we actually used to the
council voting section
-mike
pgpWoAg
On Thursday 10 August 2006 19:32, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Also, I can probably hit brad_mssw for you if you want. Since I work
> with him now.
hindsight is 20/20 eh ? no point in "blaming" people for decisions made when
at the time, said decisions were the "best"
-mike
pgp0p9SR79Nsv.pgp
Descri
On Sunday 20 August 2006 05:35, sHadoW MaN wrote:
> I am never has programmed on Linux but I looked on the net about hardware
> interrupts library
try http://forums.gentoo.org/
-mike
pgpkWVRc0kd7g.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday 20 August 2006 08:01, paul kölle wrote:
> How do I get the name of the called script in /etc/init.d? Better ideas?
use $SVCNAME
see the sshd init.d script for some examples
-mike
pgp5jeIZEuyzr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday 20 August 2006 11:22, paul kölle wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Sunday 20 August 2006 08:01, paul kölle wrote:
> >> How do I get the name of the called script in /etc/init.d? Better ideas?
> >
> > use $SVCNAME
> >
> > see the sshd init.
On Thursday 17 August 2006 05:20, Duncan wrote:
> excerpted below, on Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:01:37 -0700:
> > I told a friend that there were some in the community who called
> > proprietary software slaveryware. His response? "Holy shit!" If that
> > term spreads, we can forget about convincing othe
On Monday 21 August 2006 10:29, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-21-08 at 12:21 +0100, Herbie Hopkins wrote:
> > I've always viewed the emul libs as a temporary measure until we had full
> > multilib fuctionality in portage. Afaik the only person working on this
> > was eradicator who has been m
On Monday 21 August 2006 13:39, Olivier Crete wrote:
> Will we make emul-x86-gtk-libs block gtk+? We dont have use based
> deps/blockers...
building for ABI is unrelated to USE flags
> how long will it take before we have API/arch based
> ones.
you really think having users build ABI stuff on t
On Tuesday 22 August 2006 11:17, Duncan wrote:
> FWIW, eradicator active once again
sorry, but not really
active when it comes to something core like toolchain does not describe
eradicator's behavior
> After all, there'd have
> never been a need for eselect-compiler if gcc-config wasn't broken
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 16:30, Luis Medinas wrote:
> So i'm asking for a solution either remove xmms, move the maintainer for
> anyone who volunteer or the sound herd.
no one has answered the previous problems ... xmms is the only audioplayer
that actually works on some platforms ...
plus, h
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 23:23, lnxg33k wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > use this instead ... makes for cleaner output:
> > pushd "${BUILDDIR}" > /dev/null
>
> Would `cd foo` and `cd -` work just as well in place of `pushd` and `popd`?
> Recent tip I ra
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 23:32, Luis Medinas wrote:
> If noone takes it will be saved on overlays.gentoo.org. Everyone needs
> to know that xmms is old and tired (obsolete). A few developers on
> redhat, mandriva and suse marked xmms as obsolete. Now it's our turn to
> move it to our darkness re
On Thursday 24 August 2006 05:28, Lars Weiler wrote:
> See attached a list of Attic-files which are +500k in size.
> If you want to keep one of these files, tell me. Otherwise
> I'll remove them on Sunday.
i thought the entire point of the CVS attic is that when we want to retrieve
something, it
On Sunday 27 August 2006 04:11, Robert Cernansky wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:03:16 +0100 Luis Medinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sounds like we have volunteers to maintain xmms for a couple of
> > years. I offered a good solution but looks like nobody likes
> > it. I'm still open for suges
just a reminder here peeps ... council voting ends soon, so get in there and
vote (i bet it's something jesus would do)
-mike
pgp2aH0DblEjt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Monday 28 August 2006 14:50, Tuan Van wrote:
> where do I get "I voted" sticker?
http://www.cafepress.com/spankgentoo.13531918
-mike
pgpPjdam0BQPU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 10:44, Simon Stelling wrote:
> head -n4 $(<~/.sig) > ~/.sig
seriously, when did this turn into the forums ? well at least he doesnt have
a 640x480 animated gif in there (yet?) ...
-mike
pgpaBmIXK5PiT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 11:25, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Aah, good to see that you're picking up one of the more useful Paludis
> features.
the idea has been around before Paludis, it just implemented custom sets
before portage
-mike
pgpWszNbY8LeU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tuesday 29 August 2006 14:22, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:41:26PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > seriously, when did this turn into the forums ? well at least he doesnt
> > have a 640x480 animated gif in there (yet?) ...
>
> Actually there&#x
just found another broken package that uses the 'static' USE flag to control
generation of static libraries (aka libfoo.a)
this is very much wrong ... USE=static is only to control the static-ness of
binaries ... if your package has an option to build shared and static
libraries, then it had be
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 11:54, Daniel Drake wrote:
> For this reason we are suggesting everyone migrates to the b44 in-kernel
> driver
works great for me :)
> (I guess net-misc/bcm4400 doesn't really have any users anyway...).
i tried it, it killed my kernel everytime :(
-mike
pgpQG9i3l4o
On Thursday 31 August 2006 13:19, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> BTW: is there a way to control whether static libs should be
> installed ?
`man make.conf` -> INSTALL_MASK
dont even think about filing a bug though when something breaks because it's
missing static libs cause it'll just make me stab you
On Thursday 31 August 2006 18:53, Chris White wrote:
> On Thursday 31 August 2006 15:42, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> > I just filed bug #140776 for you because I masked out all shared
> > libraries and my system doesn't work. You only mentioned masking out
> > static libraries so I didn't mask those ou
On Thursday 31 August 2006 19:41, Alec Warner wrote:
> He didn't say "use install masked to mask out shared libraries" he said
> "use install mask to mask static libraries".
looks like two people missed the short bus actually ...
-mike
pgpL1XLzxTYzu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the
2nd Thursday once a month), 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 dev
On Friday 01 September 2006 14:26, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:44:59PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> > As discussed here?, the author of cdrtools, J?rg Schilling, violates the
> > GPL in his application, by building GPL software with CDDL licensed
> > makefiles as well as linking m
On Friday 01 September 2006 15:18, Chris White wrote:
> On Friday 01 September 2006 11:26, Greg KH wrote:
> > No, we should just stop distributing the prebuild image in our release
> > and live cds. We do not have to do anything with the package in
> > portage, as it is the user who builds cdrtool
On Friday 01 September 2006 16:28, Chris White wrote:
> On Friday 01 September 2006 13:20, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > set the LICENSE variable and/or add an ewarn to the ebuild ... pushing
> > your ideals by removing the package is wrong
> > -mike
>
> Ok, where the hell
On Saturday 02 September 2006 00:01, Alec Warner wrote:
> and the tinderbox[1.5]
>
> [1.5] http://tinderbox.x86.dev.gentoo.org/default-linux/x86/app-cdr/
fixed
-mike
pgpaAQeW2iVd6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Monday 04 September 2006 02:45, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Josh Saddler wrote:
> > Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > [. . .]
> >
> > Define "contributors" -- is this a special status? If it is, how does one
> > *become* a "contributor" to get these rights?
> >
> > This is potentially a big problem, the
On Monday 04 September 2006 04:32, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> they are not defined by their status. I wonder why this word is causing
> problems ..
of course they are defined by their status ... you cant go handing out
bugzilla access to joe blow because he "contributed something"
> The status is
On Monday 04 September 2006 23:38, Luis Medinas wrote:
> Now the license problems are fixed and we can ship this on our portage
> tree tarballs for our new releases etc...
there was/is no problem beyond our livecds/binpkgs
-mike
pgp59LxF6Qaup.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 02:33, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> While I'm still awake...
next time wait until you're more awake so you dont cross-post ;)
-mike
pgprWhp64b0zQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 09:21, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> The following packages are now maintainer-needed, if anyone wants to
> pick them up feel free to do so.
sorry to see you go man
> sys-boot/raincoat
> sys-boot/cromwell-bin
> sys-boot/cromwell
> net-fs/ccxstream
> app-cdr/extract-xiso
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 12:44, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> (Sorry about this clear waste of bandwidth...it's early and my pun
> senses still have control of my fingers...)
you're clogging up the tubes !
-mike
pgpYWZx1rmgAH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
lets try resending this since our shitty mail servers seemed to have eaten it
On Sunday 03 September 2006 05:20, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> or the
> committer be listed as a maintainer email address along with whoever is
> being proxied.
maybe extend metadata.xml syntax ... add a proxy dev maintaine
lets try resending this since our shitty mail servers seemed to have eaten it
On Sunday 03 September 2006 10:22, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > The maintainer must still be someone with a
> > gentoo email.
>
> is that written down somewhere? I was under the impression that it
On Thursday 07 September 2006 20:31, Chris White wrote:
> So, wondering why people use Gentoo.
penis envy
-mike
pgpD0ckVyufBA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
1101 - 1200 of 3334 matches
Mail list logo
