On Wednesday 14 March 2007, Alexandre Buisse wrote:
> The answer to that remark, and it has already been done in today's
> discussions, is that we should follow the spirit of the law and not its
> letter. But then, why do we need a Code of Conduct at all? There is
> nothing in it that people don't
On Monday 19 March 2007, Pierre-Yves Rofes wrote:
> Well, I'd tend to say that it's not noticeable even under $(HOME) because
> one issues a "ls [-l]" more often than a "ls -a[l]".
> Besides, moving all into ~/.config is just moving the problem somewhere
> else, not really solving it.
what is the
On Monday 19 March 2007, Josh Saddler wrote:
> I prefer per app configs right in my homedir, not in ~/.config/ --
this isnt really a point that will ever be "solved" ... you'll always have
people who prefer the classical *nix approach over anything else
-mike
pgptP04nsuaBx.pgp
Description: PGP
On Sunday 18 March 2007, Simon Stelling wrote:
> Petteri Räty wrote:
> > Many applications save preferences in ~/./. When testing
> > applications please make sure you test with an empty directory to catch
> > cases when an upgrade works fine but a clean install doesn't. Thanks.
>
> Even better: Fi
On Monday 19 March 2007, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 03:38 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > what is the problem as you see it ? the nice thing about having a
> > ~/.config/ is that it's a directory that can obviously be added to
> > backups or sync
On Thursday 22 March 2007, Shaochun Wang wrote:
> I write several ebuilds for packages which aren't available in the
> portage currently. I'd like to share them with gentoo community, but I
> don't know how to publish these ebuilds. And I also don't know by which
> way a package will be added to th
On Thursday 22 March 2007, Catalin Zamfir Alexandru wrote:
>
check your e-mail settings please, they're obviously broken
-mike
pgpV8vEPaWdp5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Friday 23 March 2007, Josh Saddler wrote:
> I'm very strongly against using Gentoo SoC time and resources for things
> that are not officially part of Gentoo (yes, this statement could be
> spun however you wish) or are not official Gentoo projects. And no, just
> because a project has Gentoo de
On Saturday 24 March 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Joshua Baergen kirjoitti:
> > It appears to be a problem with gentoolkit-dev-0.2.6.3. 0.2.6.2
> > produces proper changelogs.
>
> Until the problem is solved everyone should downgrade back to 0.2.6.2. I
> package.masked 0.2.6.3 in the meanwhile.
is
On Saturday 24 March 2007, Caleb Cushing wrote:
> could bugzilla be changed so that the default search includes bugs in all
> status. instead of just open bugs. I know sometimes I'll miss closed bugs
> because I'll forget to do an advanced search.
there is an open regression bug about this
-mike
On Saturday 24 March 2007, Mike Kelly wrote:
> Or maybe people need to lighten up a bit more
there it is
-mike
pgpfSL9nLJFvd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Saturday 24 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> It looks like our social contract doesn't prohibit Gentoo from being
> dependent upon a single sponsor or corporation. In the interests of
> keeping Gentoo run by the developers rather than any outside party, how
> about the following addition
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Hmmm, I'm not sure how much of an regression this is. AFAICT bugzilla
> always required to prefix the search with ALL if you want to search for
> resolved bugs as well. There's even a note about this directly on the
> homepage, below the search box. :)
y
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 04:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> > > It looks like our social contract doesn't prohibit Gentoo from being
> > > dependent upon
On Saturday 24 March 2007, Matthias Langer wrote:
> In my opinion, any project that has reasonable potential to improve
> Gentoo as a whole
which doesnt apply here
-mike
pgpkZMxj5OVdW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Saturday 24 March 2007, Matthias Langer wrote:
> > > In my opinion, any project that has reasonable potential to improve
> > > Gentoo as a whole
> >
> >
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i dont see why this is required ? ignoring the fact that the wording
> > is way too vague to do anything but cause confusion and people to
> > spout long winded rants, se
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 11:00:00 -0400
>
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > i dont se
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Which of the following do you think is most likely to happen?
and which of the following do you think is most likely to happen ?
* Ridiculous scenario #1
* Ridiculous scenario #2
* Spin of recent events to look like a conspiracy
obviously the las
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> On Sunday 25 of March 2007 17:54:24 Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> > Support for an alternative package manager != language bindings for said
> > package manager :P
>
> heh, I just wanted a clarification of the Council standpoint in the matter
> of findi
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> I'd like to ask what are the negative side-effects of adding such
> paragraph. Are there any true negative side-effects to a specification
> like that?
>
> A different topic is the way the paragraph is written. If we don't
> like how it is written
On Sunday 25 March 2007, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> > It looks like our social contract doesn't prohibit Gentoo from being
> > dependent upon a single sponsor or corporation. In the interests of
> > keeping Gentoo run by the developers rather than any outside party
On Saturday 24 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> It looks like our social contract doesn't prohibit Gentoo from being
> dependent upon a single sponsor or corporation. In the interests of
> keeping Gentoo run by the developers rather than any outside party, how
> about the following addition
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 16:47 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i think this whole idea is a moot point anyways ... go visit the Gentoo
> > Foundation web site and see Chapter 2 Section 5
>
> And how exactly does this help u
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sunday 25 March 2007, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2007-03-25 at 16:47 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > i think this whole idea is a moot point any
On Monday 26 March 2007, Alec Warner wrote:
> Many projects have old and nasty webpages. This has been a problem within
> gentoo since before I arrived and probably has been a problem since we
> started having webpages. One of the issues I wish to address is whether
> or not writing webpages in X
On Monday 26 March 2007, Catalin Zamfir Alexandru wrote:
> For anyone, I can host a mirror for gentoo.org. Just contact me.
we're not worried about mirrors, we're worried about the core infrastructure
which really cant be mirrored
if you're offering to host a web node mirror though, please open
On Monday 26 March 2007, bret curtis wrote:
> Only wimps use tape backup: *real **men* just upload their important
> stuff on *ftp*, and let the rest of the world mirror it. -- LT :1996
actually, i wonder if this would be useful ... we set up a master backup
server where we post raw svn/cvs/etc..
On Monday 26 March 2007, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> I just realized that there not only doesn't seem to be any consensus
> about what the location of /lib/rcscripts should be (as witnessed by
> the location where the following packages install
it should be /$(get_libdir)/rcscripts
no one has really
On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> I believe Monotone ( as well as many others ) would do what is wanted.
i simply cannot fully express myself at how terrible monotone is
-mike
pgp426L52RwFu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday 25 March 2007, Michael Krelin wrote:
> > the werent the same question nor were they the same answer
>
> They weren't the same, but the second answer was definitely wrong:
> > > So is alternative package manager support something that's considered
> > > important and a priority by the Coun
On Tuesday 27 March 2007, bret curtis wrote:
> Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 19:44 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> On Monday 26 March 2007, bret curtis wrote:
> >>> Only wimps use tape backup: *real **men* just upload their important
> >>&g
On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> both of which were discussed at length the
> last time this topic came up...
yeah, i think before anyone tries to start contributing to a dscm thread, they
search the archives and read the extensive discussions that have happened
already
-mike
On Tuesday 27 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Do you acknowledge that Portage is a severe limiting factor when it
> comes to improving the Gentoo user experience as a whole?
what a lame question ... rather than waste time on this, why dont we get to
some relevant issues ...
to start with, P
On Tuesday 20 March 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- kirjoitti:
> > # Michael Sterrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (19 Mar 2007)
> > # masked for removal in April.
> > # Old and nasty. Not supported by upstream.
> > # use the newer versions of clanlib instead.
> > =dev-games/clanl
On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Gentoo's lack of progress is an extremely relevant issue...
dont push your own agendas under the guise that Gentoo is lacking progress
> > to start with, Paludis will never be an official package manager for
> > Gentoo so long as you are heavily i
On Friday 30 March 2007, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 20:42 +0200, Matthias Langer wrote:
> > i don't think that personal issues should be taken into account when it
> > comes to choosing a new official package manager for gentoo.
>
> It's relevant in that people have to work with
On Friday 30 March 2007, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On 3/30/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the middle ground we're taking it is to leave these things in portage but
> > masked with the clear message "if it breaks, you fix it; dont bother the
> >
On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > - you are not wanted as an official Gentoo developer ... the past
> > clearly shows this
>
> Not really... The process by which I became an unofficial Gentoo
> developer was so flawed that it got replaced as a result...
sure, the first time ...
On Friday 30 March 2007, Anant Narayanan wrote:
> The logic is flawed. I don't understand why Gentoo can't switch to
> paludis so long as there are "in-house" Gentoo developers ready to
> maintain and support it.
that is your opinion. mine is that the official package manager must be led
and mai
On Friday 30 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Instead, you have to worry about Gentoo infra people pulling commit
> access under the guise of 'security measures' and refusing devrel
> requests to restore it.
agreed, that was complete bs ... it has since been rectified
> But you're not address
we've noticed that many things in the tree abuse the fact that the portage
helpers utilize environment variables to communicate ... for example, people
setting DOCDESTTREE by hand rather than using `docinto`
unless some one can give me a valid reason for this stuff, the plan is to fix
these ebu
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
> On 3/31/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > regardless of whether someone wishes to help fix bugs (thanks by the
> > way), i dont think we want to unmask these
>
> Loud and clear - over.
>
> That mea
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Andrej Kacian wrote:
> "Christopher Covington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The first condition you list is a sort of nativism that I for one
> > would expect not to find in a successful copyleft project created on
> > the Internet. Why should the code Gentoo uses be wr
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Too late for all the affected users tho. Point is it's a major
> > security hole which no sane organisation would even consider for
> > mission-critical code.
>
> These arguments are getting weaker and wea
On Sunday 01 April 2007, Alec Warner wrote:
> For cron, one would need to set the PATH to something sane though.
i thought sane cron systems would setup a sane PATH for you:
/sbin:/usr/sbin:/bin:/usr/bin
-mike
pgpKWhRZ0eMFs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1500 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
G
On Wednesday 04 April 2007, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> Since i tried to get things running for the last week or two, i need
> to throw in my 2 cents here.
>
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 10:18:17AM +0200, Bryan Østergaard wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 01:51:56AM -0400, Mi
On Wednesday 04 April 2007, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> I compiled a list of things that i think need to be done such as
> defining some general guidelines for work,
sorry, due to the thread (things for Council to talk about), i thought the
work you were talking about was stuff for the Council to di
On Sunday 01 April 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 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 list to see.
another one i had mentioned earlier:
- a time frame on moving gentoo-
On Thursday 05 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Unfortunately, what the GLEP doesn't do is prevent the Council from
> having secret meetings and refusing to discuss not only the content of
> those meetings but even the topic. Perhaps a requirement that any
> Council meeting logs be made public
On Thursday 05 April 2007, Danny van Dyk wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 5. April 2007 21:20 schrieb Mike Frysinger:
> > On Sunday 01 April 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> > > vote on, let us know ! Sim
On Thursday 05 April 2007, Wernfried Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 02:18:40PM -0700, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > I object and hope this is never done. There are things said on core
> > that I do not wish to be public. I've sent mails myself that if they
> > were ever going to be published publicly
thanks to some awesome sponsor help, we have s390 and s390x hosts now (btw, as
of two days ago, we have a port of Gentoo to s390x)
for devs who wish to help out the s390/s390x team, feel free to contact me ...
note that i mean people who wish to join the s390/s390x team, not just test
random pa
On Saturday 31 March 2007, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> we've noticed that many things in the tree abuse the fact that the portage
> helpers utilize environment variables to communicate ... for example,
> people setting DOCDESTTREE by hand rather than using `docinto`
>
> unless so
i havent found anything that uses pwdb to justify it being in our
default-linux system ... so unless someone can point out why it's needed
anymore, i'm going to punt it from profiles/default-linux/packages
-mike
pgp8YxUC1lwkZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
working here is no longer fun; the following are up for grabs ...
drop me a line if something interests you
app-benchmarks/nbench
sys-power/nvram-wakeup
sys-power/nvram-reboot
sys-power/athcool
sys-process/runit
sys-process/minit
sys-process/schedutils
sys-process/acct
sys-process/atop
sys-proces
On Sunday 08 April 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> > working here is no longer fun; the following are up for
> > grabs ... drop me a line if something interests you
>
> So you are looking to remove these things from the base-system herd or
> new
On Sunday 08 April 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > sys-apps/byld
> > sys-apps/yard
> > sys-apps/mkinitrd
> > app-admin/superadduser
>
> I can probably pick these up if nobody else wants them.
three of those should be a cake walk ... mkin
On Sunday 08 April 2007, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > sys-apps/mii-diag
>
> Can this one just go away? Is there anything that it does that ethtool
> doesn't do?
yeah, newer net-tools integrates this package
> > sys-libs/nss-db
>
> My name should be on this one already.
i specifically checked beca
On Sunday 08 April 2007, Marcelo Góes wrote:
> As far as I can see, doenvd is more correct because it is
doenvd was written specifically to replace `insinto /etc/env.d`
> Does it make sense to allow both styles?
not really
> Is it worth it to convert everything to doenvd?
yes please
-mike
pg
On Monday 09 April 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Marcelo Góes kirjoitti:
> > I just did a quick grep of the tree and found 129 ebuilds that
> > use doenvd and 134 that use insinto /etc/env.d.
>
> There are probably also lot of things using insinto /etc/init.d and
> /etc/conf.d too that should be fixe
On Tuesday 10 April 2007, Timothy Redaelli wrote:
> Imho is a waste of time to maintain two projects which does the same
> things (genloop and qlop)
doubt it'll be possible to convince the developers to merge here ... genlop is
written in perl and qlop is written in C ...
-mike
pgpb0w0E2LgeK.pg
On Tuesday 10 April 2007, Andrej Kacian wrote:
> Timothy Redaelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Imho is a waste of time to maintain two projects which does the same
> > things (genloop and qlop)
>
> Perhaps because each has features that the other doesn't (genlop's --date,
> for example).
because
On Tuesday 10 April 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> I propose we extend project xml to describe current stuff going on in the
> project in question and their estimated completion date.
mmm good ...
> Then we require this file to be updated monthly.
... not so good
-mike
pgpz8Qu87JVkL.pgp
Descripti
On Wednesday 11 April 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Personally, I'd prefer we fix the stuff and simply inform the
> maintainers, rather than force them to have to do the work as some form
> of punishment for not following policy close enough. ;]
i drop notes to gentoo-dev when doing mass change
On Wednesday 11 April 2007, Brandon Edens wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 12:59:35AM +0200, Marius Mauch wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 21:32:49 +0200
> > Alexandre Buisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Please criticize this with everything constructive you > can think of.
> >
e2fsprogs has integrated resize2fs now so no point in keeping around the old
unmaintained ext2resize -> punt
-mike
pgpenCYeiyIfT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thursday 12 April 2007, Timothy Redaelli wrote:
> Mike Frysinger ha scritto:
> > e2fsprogs has integrated resize2fs now so no point in keeping around the
> > old unmaintained ext2resize -> punt
>
> You should package.mask it for one month
it is in package.mask
-
On Thursday 12 April 2007, Jeff Walter wrote:
> I can understand traceroute being setuid, but why put it in /usr/sbin so
> only root sees it? If we only want root to run it, it doesn't need to be
> setuid. It just doesn't make sense for a setuid application to only be
> directly available to root
On Thursday 12 April 2007, Timothy Redaelli wrote:
> You should (also) fix net-misc/iputils for /usr/sbin/traceroute6
yes
> maybe it's better to create a dedicate ebuild for traceroute6?
no
-mike
pgphDuLQKdIMc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thursday 12 April 2007, Jeff Walter wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > this package has always sucked ... it needs to be punted for the newer
> > one at http://dmitry.butskoy.name/traceroute
>
> Well, that's a separate subject all together. I'm just talking
On Thursday 12 April 2007, Torsten Veller wrote:
> * Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 15:20 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > another one i had mentioned earlier:
> > > - a time frame on moving gentoo-core to public archives ... two years
here is a summary of this month's meeting. people seem to think that the CoC
is set in stone now when in reality it is not ... feel free to hilite
anything you feel wasnt addressed in the previous discussion or anything new
you've thought of (i went through the previous threads and tried to dis
On Friday 13 April 2007, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > * Remove automatic directory making for do*
>
> Why?
hmm guess i should have read each item ... this is not something we want to do
and i dont recall anyone ever mentioning this change in behavior
-mike
pgpJHP7H0V6k1.pgp
On Friday 13 April 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * src_test always called except if RESTRICT=test
>
> I don't think this would fit into EAPI, to me it's an implementation
> detail of the package manager, or why should the ebuild care about it?
hmm, i'd
i plan on adding old-linux to use.force in the linux-2.4 profiles and
converting the "no-old-linux" USE flag to that ... that way things like
module-init-tools from now on will only support linux-2.6+
any comments ?
-mike
pgpreBOGaB1uH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Friday 13 April 2007, Benjamin Smee (strerror) wrote:
> On Friday 13 April 2007 12:41:43 Roy Marples wrote:
> > If you care about such things, then you need to pester the maintainer
> > of said package to write an init script for it that has the following
> > dependency
>
> I'll look into it, an
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > * Remove automatic directory making for do*
> >
> > No
>
> It masks all kinds of programming screwups. doblah should make a blah,
> not make a blah and poss
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> Either way, EAPI=1 *should* have a bit more then just slot deps in
> > >> my opinion; very least it needs discussion to discern wh
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Except there are. Hence why we want EAPI 1 in the short term, not
> > > several years from now. The stuff that will take longer can go into
> > > a later EAPI.
>
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It masks all kinds of programming screwups. doblah should make a
> > > blah, not make a blah and possibly make a directory.
> >
> > name one
>
> dosym&#
On Friday 13 April 2007, Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> On 4/13/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ha, it wont even be leaving package.mask soonish, so i doubt you have any
> > stable worries
> >
> > i wonder how hard we want to ride this though ... targe
On Friday 13 April 2007, Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> On 4/13/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 13 April 2007, Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> > > It's mid-April and 2007.0 is still nowhere in sight
> >
> > you're clearly not part of the r
On Friday 13 April 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 11:23 -0500, Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> > It's mid-April and 2007.0 is still nowhere in sight, so the idea that
> > there will be a 2007.1 is looking increasingly unrealistic. Please
> > don't make baselayout-2's unmasking contin
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > These fail:
> > >
> > > cp somefile dirdoesnotexist/
> > > mv somefile dirdoesnotexist/
> >
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Joshua Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Erm, no I have not at all (speaking as a project lead for x86). Test
> > is not viable for a lot of reason as being on by default. One that I
> > can come up with off the top of my head is php. The test
On Friday 13 April 2007, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:02:29 +0200
>
> Marius Mauch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Because I was giving a one line summary, rather than a description
> > > of the full change. The full description has been discussed
> > > elsewhere several times.
On Friday 13 April 2007, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> 1). Even though src_test is not mandatory in the here and now any
> package that provides a test suite that fails said tests has a bug. It
> may not be a critical bug but it is in fact a bug.
>
> 2). The proper fix, again in the here and now, for said
On Saturday 14 April 2007, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 14-04-2007 01:19:41 -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 07:32:12AM +0100, Steve Long wrote:
> > > Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > > This GLEP has been laying around for some long time now in my gleps
> > > > dir. I nearly forg
On Saturday 14 April 2007, Matthias Langer wrote:
> bug 165085
i'd do some research into the glibc situation before you go pointing at it
-mike
pgpe73v4Qiw7K.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sunday 15 April 2007, Catalin Zamfir Alexandru wrote:
> On Sunday 15 April 2007 11:16, Alin Năstac wrote:
> > pppoed is a user space implementation of PPPoE, needed only for kernel
> > versions <2.4.
> >
> > Since we don't have such kernel versions in our tree anymore, I've hard
> > masked it an
On Sunday 15 April 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Rémi Cardona wrote:
> > Right now, the reworked patch saves a file in
> > /usr/share/gnome2-eclass/${PF}.icons
> >
> > Since committing this will affect everybody including stable users, I
> > would like ebuild/eclass gurus to review this small patc
On Tuesday 17 April 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Can you guys move all this garbage to the gentoo-devrel mailing list?
> This is exactly the kind of discussion it exists for. This has nothing
> to do with development.
hmm, that sounds peachy clean to me
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is
does anyone actually find this useful ? i think ive used the value in there
like once (when in reality a `md5sum` would have worked just as well) ...
otherwise, from my perspective:
- it causes annoying bogus hunks in diffs
- not uncommon for people to contact me as the maintainer because i'm
On Friday 20 April 2007, Bjarke Istrup Pedersen wrote:
> Hey everyone :-)
*cough* bad cross-poster *cough*
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Friday 27 April 2007, Marius Mauch wrote:
> I used to remove old "updates" files from time to time in the past,
> guess it's time to do it again.
that doesnt sound like a good idea to me at all ...
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday 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
G
On Tuesday 01 May 2007, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> There was some discussion about forcing/not forcing tests in EAPI-1, but
> there was clearly no compromise.
the compromise was that requiring in spec is wrong ... default handling of
tests is up to the package manager / profiles / teams
> Imho,
On Tuesday 01 May 2007, Petteri Räty wrote:
> Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
> > 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 list to see.
>
> I would like the coun
1501 - 1600 of 3334 matches
Mail list logo
