On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 01:34:12PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 01/14/2018 06:53 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > +# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: MODULES_OPTIONAL_USE_IUSE_DEFAULT
> > +# @DESCRIPTION:
> > +# A boolean to control the IUSE default state for the MODULES_OPTIONAL_USE
> > USE
> > +# flag. D
On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 03:48:10PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 01/10/2018 04:54 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > What are we saying newpath should do differently than checkpath if I
> > go this route?
>
> I think this covers everything that we've talked
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:41:21AM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> If I want to create /run/foo and /run/foo/bar, both owned by the "foo"
> user, how would I do it using newpath?
>
> 1. I could create /run/foo with owner "foo", and then create
>/run/foo/bar with owner "foo". That can be done
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 07:19:59PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> Not at all. I'm working this out as I go, so better to speak up if
> something looks fishy.
>
> There are a few risks that I see with the first approach...
>
>
> Risk #1: From what I can tell, the current implementation of check
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 07:53:06PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 01/19/2018 07:16 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > It looks like we can't use your --as suggestion if we want to be
> > able to create paths in /var/lib and /var/spool that are owned by
> > non
All,
We keep hitting issues on various systems where portage is removing the
/var/run symlink once it deletes everything that uses this path.
The fix is going to be to make baselayout take ownership of this
symlink.
In looking at doing this, I realized that baselayout doesn't take
ownership of a
Hi all,
I have noticed that in the latest versions of udev we are patching the
default upstream rules to accomodate our "uucp" group.
I don't think it is a good idea to patch default rules, so, I want to
bring up possible fixes.
First, baselayout has had the "dialout" group since 2015, so the
All,
here is a proposed newsitem for baselayout 2.5.
Let me know what you think, including whether these are newsitem-worthy
or not.
Thanks,
William
Title: baselayout 2.5 updates
Author: William Hubbs
Posted: 2018-02-xx
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 2.0
Display-If-Installed:
signature.asc
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >
> >> Eliminating ROOTPATH seems like a significant change. Was this
> >> officially discussed somewhere that I missed?
> >
> >>
:
>
>
> On 08/02/18 22:13, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >> However, there are plenty of examples of commands that normal users
> >> may run from sbin. Moving these commands often causes problems for
&g
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:49:52PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 02/08/2018 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > There are actually quite a few binaries in /sbin and /usr/sbin which
> > can be useful for non-root users. Sure, we could go through there
> > carefully and move stuff to /bin b
On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 03:34:51PM +, Duncan wrote:
> William Hubbs posted on Thu, 08 Feb 2018 13:52:56 -0600 as excerpted:
*snip*
> > The second change is that baselayout is taking ownership of most of the
> > directories it creates. This includes all directories in / and /us
On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 12:15:43PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 03:34:51PM +, Duncan wrote:
> > William Hubbs posted on Thu, 08 Feb 2018 13:52:56 -0600 as excerpted:
>
> *snip*
>
> > > The second change is that baselayout is taki
All,
here is an updated newsitem based on the comments I have received so
far.
William
Title: baselayout 2.5 updates
Author: William Hubbs
Posted: 2018-02-xx
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 2.0
Display-If-Installed:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:07:59AM +0900, Benda Xu wrote:
> Hi William,
>
> William Hubbs writes:
>
> > The second change is that baselayout is taking ownership of most of the
> > directories it creates. This includes all directories in / and /usr
> > excluding /li
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 10:10:26AM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> W dniu nie, 25.02.2018 o godzinie 15∶17 +0900, użytkownik Benda Xu
> napisał:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Yes, it's 2018. But there are still RHEL 4 and 5 systems running
> > antique kernels such as 2.6.8 and 2.6.18. In my experience, many
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:00:47PM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Mar 2018, Martin Vaeth wrote:
>
> > Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>
> >> I think the conclusion is that github generates tarballs on the
> >> fly, and therefore we cannot rely on them being invariant over a
> >> long t
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 04:44:26PM +0100, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 20/03/18 13:17, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> > Could someone please explain how this doesn't directly contradict the
> > core tenets of an open and inclusive community?
> It's fairly simple to produce a justification of the decis
All,
I just happened to notice the following warning from portage when
bumping dhcpcd.
> One or more empty directories installed to /var:
> /var/lib/dhcpcd
> If those directories need to be preserved, please make sure to create
> or mark them for keeping using 'keepdir'. Future versions of Por
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 05:15:28PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 29-03-2018 16:47:51 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > W dniu czw, 29.03.2018 o godzinie 09∶39 -0500, użytkownik William Hubbs
> > napisał:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > I just happened to noti
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:47:21AM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 03/29/2018 11:28 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
> >
> > Is there any particular reason we need to remove them?
> >
>
> The PMS says that empty directories are undefined, so the portage
> behavior of installing them and leaving them a
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 12:24:38PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 03/29/2018 11:57 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>
> >> The PMS says that empty directories are undefined, so the portage
> >> behavior of installing them and leaving them alone leads to
> >>
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 12:42:09PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 30 marca 2018 11:01:33 CEST, Zac Medico napisał(a):
> >On 03/30/2018 01:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >> Dnia 30 marca 2018 09:07:03 CEST, Zac Medico
> >napisał(a):
> >>> On 03/29/2018 10:20 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 30
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:33:14PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> I recently ran into a REQUIRED_USE constraint that required I select
> between berkdb and gdbm for an email client.
This has now hit stable and is affecting me because I can't upgrade the
email client without putting something in pac
On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 02:55:53PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 04/07/2018 02:44 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > I'm with floppym on this one. Is there a specific reason we enable them
> > globally?
>
> It's a relic from before we had IUSE defaul
Hi all,
In the past, openrc has had a dependency on sysvvinit because it called
killall5. Since it doesn't do that any more, I have been asked to remove
the dependency [1]. Another advantage of doing this is that people will
be able to build profiles without an init package, for containers for
exa
Here is the latest version of this virtual based on feedback from the
list so far.
I have added some providers and cleaned up IUSE.
Thanks,
William
# Copyright 1999-2018 Gentoo Foundation
# Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
EAPI=6
DESCRIPTION="virtual for proces
After some discussion on IRC, I need to drop busybox from this virtual
because it is in packages already. OpenRC needs to be dropped because
for now we do not have a way to make sure both openrc and sysvinit get
installed in stage 3 if openrc is listed both in virtual/init and
virtual/service-manag
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 12:48:09AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 04/26/2018 11:34 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:35:15 -0700
> > Zac Medico wrote:
> >
> >> emerge --depclean, resulting in an unbootable system. Just say-in.
> >
> > And depclean being very verbose doesn't do ma
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 12:28:43PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:45 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 12:48:09AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> >> On 04/26/2018 11:34 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 07:54:16PM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 09/05/18 19:50, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 May 2018 18:12:32 +0100
> > "M. J. Everitt" wrote:
> >
> >>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It's worth noting that the default rules shipped wi
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 12:36:28AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> I'd like to just make a short announcement that I've updated
> the developer commit timeline [1]. Besides the usual periodic update,
> there are two major changes:
>
> a. I've added commit counts to the bars (in th
All,
Mostly because of the recent "trustless infrastructure" thread, I am
wondering why we are still distributing the portage tree primarily
via rsync instead of git?
Can someone educate me on that, and is it worth considering moving away
from rsync distribution?
Thanks,
William
signature.a
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 08:32:55AM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 10:22:35 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Mostly because of the recent "trustless infrastructure" thread, I am
> > wondering why we are still distributi
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:40:53AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:32 AM Brian Dolbec wrote:
> > 2) we have a large infrastructure of rsync mirrors, which we do not for
> > git.
> >
>
> Do we need them. I've yet to see somebody complain about poor syncing
> performance fro
On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 09:09:13AM +0100, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 01/30/2016 06:45 PM, Alex Brandt wrote:
> > Hey Guys,
> >
> > I've oft wondered why we don't automatically assign bugs to the
> > ebuild maintainer (if a CPV is in the subject). Would there be an
> > issue with adding a bug modi
As one of the maintainers of sys-fs/udev, I am very conflicted about
this.
I tend to agree with Kent that we need to be absolutely sure before we
switch the default that eudev will maintain feature parity with udev,
now and in the future, e.g. when a new release of udev hits, a new
release of eude
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 03:23:15PM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Feb 2016, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> > Well, if we're going to force it to be in the stage3, I guess this
> > boils down to whether eudev or udev is the better nano.
>
> "Nicht alles was hinkt ist ein Vergleich", as we
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 09:52:29AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:27 AM, wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:09:58AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote
> >> On 09 Feb 2016 22:39, Duncan wrote:
> >> > Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:26:52 -0500 as excerpted:
> >> >
I'm just picking a random message in the thread to reply to.
In the past, we had a feature, I think it was called "auto use", that
would automatically turn on a use flag if the package that was needed to
support it was installed.
As an example, if we still had this, python_targets_2_7 would be
au
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 03:50:38PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 14 Feb 2016 15:47, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > On 2/14/16 3:34 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > the bring up of the daemon itself is not nearly as important as the
> > > runtime interaction of people using libudev or rules being e
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 07:11:26AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:29 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 19:34:52 -0600
> > William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> >> And, as for right now, udev-229 is in the tree, so udev can still be
>
All,
I have a bug that points out a significant issue with
/etc/init.d/mount-ro in OpenRC.
Apparently, there are issues that cause it to not work properly for file
systems which happen to be pre-mounted from an initramfs [1].
This service only exists in the Linux world; there is no equivalent in
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 07:34:20PM +0100, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Alexis Ballier schrieb:
> > It would probably generate controversy indeed, but my comment was more
> > to understand what is the root of the f34R of udev being absorbed by
> > systemd: "it is supposedly unsupported upst
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 01:22:13PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >
> > The reason it exists is very vague to me; I think it has something to do
> > with claims of data loss in the past.
> >
>
> Is there som
All,
there is a branch in the OpenRC github repo called supervisor.
On that branch, I am working on a lightweight daemon supervisor that
will be native to OpenRC.
It is based on start-stop-daemon, but it will stay around and make sure
that the daemon gets restarted if it dies.
It is still very
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 07:32:08PM +, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:51:17 -0600
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > there is a branch in the OpenRC github repo called supervisor.
>
> Interesting!
>
> > It is still very rough, and not ready for produ
On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:36:56PM +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Friday, April 1, 2016 8:33:02 PM CEST, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 01 Apr 2016 20:00, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> >> On Friday, April 1, 2016 3:58:18 AM CEST, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> ...
> >>> "being supported" != "enabled by de
On Sat, Apr 02, 2016 at 12:35:58PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 09:36:56PM +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > On Friday, April 1, 2016 8:33:02 PM CEST, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On 01 Apr 2016 20:00, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > >> On Friday,
# William Hubbs (02 Apr 2016)
# Stable dev-lang/go no longer needs this; end users should have never
# installed it on their own.
# Masked for removal on 20160409
dev-lang/go-bootstrap
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 09:03:59AM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 4 April 2016 at 08:57, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > Does anyone still use the CVS $Id$ keywords that are in all ebuilds'
> > headers, or are they being expanded anywhere? Or is there any other
> > reason why they should be kept?
>
>
All,
I thought that since the usr merge is coming up again, and since I lost
track of the message where it was brought up, I would open a
new thread to discuss it.
When it came up before, some were saying that the /usr merge violates
the fhs. I don't remember the specifics of what the claim was a
On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> > What, if any, is the benefit of squashing /usr out of the equation? I
> > happen to have a few workstations that load their /usr off an NFS share
> > presently, with some bodgery-workarou
On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 05:36:09PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
>
>
> >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 4:43 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:52AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote:
> >>> On 04/06/2016 10:58 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:12:13AM +0200, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 11:36:09 PM CEST, Richard Yao wrote:
> > As for those benefits, they do little for {/usr,}/sbin vs
> > {/usr,}/bin, which is where the incompatibilities tend to live.
> > I encountered one of these in po
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:42:01AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> > William Hubbs posted on Thu, 07 Apr 2016 09:40:49 -0500 as excerpted:
> >
> >> After the testing period is over, I'm confus
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 01:18:01PM -0700, Raymond Jennings wrote:
> Personally I think that merging things into /usr is a major policy decision
> that is likely to contravene upstream installation locations. I wouldn't
> do it lightly, if at all.
Actually, there are upstreams that already do this
On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 08:39:07PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 01:18:01PM -0700, Raymond Jennings wrote:
> > Personally I think that merging things into /usr is a major policy decision
> > that is likely to contravene upstream installation locations. I wou
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:44:06AM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> 3) I still believe there is merit in distinguishing between binaries
> that can/should be run as root, and those that can/should not. Those
> that run as root 100% of the time, or use VMs, don't really 'use' linux
> in the original se
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:20:24PM -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> Based on what I've read here in the thread, merging /bin and /sbin
> into /usr/{sbin,bin} is a matter of convenience by putting most of the
> static parts of a running system into a single path. As mentioned by
> some people, howeve
On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 09:11:48PM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 4/8/16 8:42 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> >
> > It is true that we offer a high degree of choice to users, but one of
> > those choices is not which paths to install binaries and libraries
> > i
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 12:06:47AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 4/8/16 11:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 9:51 PM, Anthony G. Basile
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Alternatively, this may introduce problems. So it seems like we're
> >> fixing something that isn't broken.
> >>
Hi Philip,
On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 06:50:49PM -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
> Can you or anyone else answer my other question re the origin of the thread ?
> -- ie is this a revival of not putting /usr on its own partition
> or is it a new proposal to alter the file system in some other way ?
The o
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 07:41:39PM +1000, Sam Jorna wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 10:57:44AM +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> > On 05/04/2016 10:52 AM, Sam Jorna wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 10:00:05AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, Austin English wrote
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 05:21:06PM +0300, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Despite it being 2016 and gtk2 pretty much dead, buried and forgotten
> upstream, many applications still support only gtk2, have subtle issues
> with their gtk3 port, or support both, with some of our userbase
> clinging
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 01:14:17PM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 5/27/16 12:59 PM, rindeal wrote:
> > On 27 May 2016 at 18:54, landis blackwell wrote:
> >> I stopped reading after you reminded me it was 2016
> >
> > Good to know, thanks for stopping by.
> >
>
> Yeah the "its year" meme
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 01:55:41PM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 5/27/16 1:44 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 01:14:17PM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> On 5/27/16 12:59 PM, rindeal wrote:
> >>> On 27 May 2016 at 18:54, landis bla
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 06:18:11PM -0500, Gordon Pettey wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Daniel Campbell (zlg)
> wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA512
> >
> > 'boot' is a symlink to '.'. Not really sure why it's there but if I remove
> > it, things break. Proba
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 01:46:27PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > So if you have some time, please reply to this thread with
> > a specific /boot layout that you think needs to be handled, with
> > as much helpful information as possible -- in
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:10:07AM -0500, james wrote:
> On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> >> forks to see if anyone was i
I'm starting a new thread so this will be a completely separate
discussion.
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 05:56:04PM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:42:14 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Anthony G. Basile
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Also there's some de
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 07:09:04PM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:01:58 -0500 William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:10:07AM -0500, james wrote:
> > > On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 07:17:44PM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
*snip*
> But the problem is that this way overlay will become completely
> broken in terms of both QA and security.
Once it is in an overlay, we don't care about qa or security any longer,
so this isn't a problem just a fact of de
Hold off on this one.
Let me work w/ releng today on this, I think we are going to create new
profiles.
William
On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 11:01:28PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> Add an amd64 no-symlink profile that removes 'lib' symlink from
> the (current) default amd64 profile. Please note that
Moving away from the lib symlink has been discussed before, and there is
a bug on it that stalled [1].
I am interested in picking up this project again and actually making it
happen.
I am not an expert in how the profiles are set up, so, can someone give
me input on how/where to create the new p
All,
there are currently 19 packages in the tree that have the luajit use
flag, and I am planning on adding 10 more.
I think this use flag should be global with the following description:
"use the lua just-in-time compiler for lua support"
If there are no objections, I'll start the transition o
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 04:15:42PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:05:57 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > there are currently 19 packages in the tree that have the luajit use
> > flag, and I am planning on adding 10 more.
>
On Sat, Aug 06, 2016 at 12:47:41PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> This packages are now up for grabs:
> app-eselect/eselect-lua
I'm taking this one, we use lua at work so I have an interest in it.
William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
All,
I have spoken with floppym about this (he is the primary maintainer of
grub2), and he told me to go for it if I want to take on the project, so
I want some thoughts.
Currently, grub2 defaults, with the multislot use flag on, to renaming
things away from upstream -- for example, grub2-install
On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 08:28:32PM +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> It will require a lot of documentation updates (wiki, handbook etc) so I
> wonder if you don't need symlinks for the grub2* names for a while even
> so to ensure compatibility for a deprecation period. New users aren't
> expec
Hi,
I spoke with rafaelmartins today, and I have joined him as a
co-maintainer for dev-lang/lua. We use it at the office, so I have an
interest in taking it forward.
My first plan is to find the latest version of Lua and look at the
upstream build system to find out what we are doing that they ar
Title: Grub2 multislot use flag is being disabled
Author: William Hubbs
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2086-01-09
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: >=sys-boot/grub-2
The multislot use flag in sys-boot/grub-2.x, which has been enabled by
default, is being disabled.
T
Here is the second draft.
Thanks,
William
Title: Grub2 multislot default setting is changing
Author: William Hubbs
Author: Ian Stakenvicius
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2016-08-10
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: >=sys-boot/grub-2
The multislot use flag in sys-b
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 10:00:12AM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> El dom, 14-08-2016 a las 23:35 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand escribió:
> > * Are there ways to reduce the stabilization lag of packages
> > - looking into the effectiveness of ALLARCHES and its use
> > - possibility for mainta
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 04:50:38PM +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 08/15/2016 04:49 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> > On 08/15/2016 04:19 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >> I'm very much for this as well. Themaintainer should be able to
> >> stabilize on al
I want to elaborate a bit more on this.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 11:12:41AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 04:50:38PM +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> > On 08/15/2016 04:49 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> > > On 08/15/2016 04:19 PM, William Hubbs
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:33:52PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I'm fine with maintainers de-keywording packages on their own
> initiative. However, if a maintainer hasn't even built a package on
> an arch, they shouldn't be stabilizing it on that arch. That would
> make the concept of stable mea
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 03:27:43PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:12 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:33:52PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> I'd rather see maintainers just yank the last stable package and break
> >&g
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 08:02:29AM +, Duncan wrote:
> William Hubbs posted on Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:01:05 -0500 as excerpted:
>
> >
> > This works unless you are talking about packages in @system.
> > I do see core packages on these arches also languish in ~ for mon
All,
I have received a request to implement a feature in OpenRC to allow
multiple software packages to drop files in a directory, /etc/modules.d
for example, which would define modules the /etc/init.d/modules script
would load.
The design I'm thinking of would not change the use of
/etc/conf.d/mo
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 06:59:32PM -0500, Matthias Maier wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016, at 18:49 CDT, Matthias Maier wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016, at 18:20 CDT, William Hubbs
> > wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >> I have receiv
All,
I'm starting this thread because of the bug I'm citing below [1].
The issue is that some systems do not use kernel modules, and do not
have kmod installed at all. Since we run modprobe unconditionally in a
few places in OpenRC, we always generate "modprobe: command not found"
errors on syste
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 10:02:35AM -0400, NP-Hardass wrote:
> Just a side note on how I currently take advantage of the modules
> initscript:
>
> I have several symlinks, one for each set of modules that I want to
> control. Then I create a corresponding conf.d based off of the modules
> conf.d.
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:23:13PM -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> Is there a reliable way to test for kernel functionality _before_
> calling modprobe? I think if a service needs certain kernel
> functionality then it should complain -- loudly, if needed -- so the
> admin knows what to do, be it b
All,
take a look at the discussion on
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591414, in particular the last
few comments.
My question is, is the emerge action newsitem worthy as Mark suggests?
Thanks,
William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
All,
it looks like app-emulation/docker expects /etc/hostname to exist.
On Gentoo, this file does not exist, so I'm wondering how we can make it
exist?
I know in OpenRC I can read it and use the value there as the hostname
instead of /etc/conf.d/hostname if it exists,but I'm not sure whether
Ope
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:39:03PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:11 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> > On 22/08/16 16:58, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>
> >> it looks like app-emulation/docker expects /etc/hostname to exist.
> >>
> >>
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:36:07PM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 08/21/2016 15:31, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > take a look at the discussion on
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591414, in particular the last
> > few comments.
> >
&
penRC runscript transition
Author: William Hubbs
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2016-08-25
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: uses runscript, please convert to openrc-run.
This message is not fatal; your system will boot normally.
To silence most of the messages, you can ru
Title: OpenRC runscript transition
Author: William Hubbs
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2016-08-25
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: uses runscript, please convert to openrc-run.
This warning is not fatal; your system will boot normally.
To silence most of the warnings
201 - 300 of 1450 matches
Mail list logo
