Carsten Lohrke posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted
below, on Thu, 05 Jan 2006 20:30:27 +0100:
> On Thursday 05 January 2006 16:46, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
>> Yeah ok, let me end up these holidays, and I'll prepare a written request
>> to change the Linux part in something else
>
> You
On 06/01/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably better to iron out what y'all actually need and what the dev
> community is willing to put up with.
>
> Eg, would do some research into it, read the archives from last few
> wars over it, in general find (and address) the issues that
Chris Bainbridge posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
excerpted below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 09:00:59 +:
> The problems being:
>
> 1) Manpower. There are already 10,000 open bugs in bugzilla (and
> growing) without adding more.
> 2) Lack of interest. Most developers aren't interested in supporting
>
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 01:37:45AM -0700, Duncan wrote:
>
> What word to use in place of "distribution", when one wants to include the
> BSDs and other "non-distributions" as well, other than
> Linux/BSD[/*ix]][/OSX], or simply *ix... *IS* there such a term?
>
Well we could say "meta operating s
On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 23:23 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> After reading -- quickly -- this thread for a day or two,
> to see what Gentoo devs are thinking, I'm surprised
> anyone has been taking this rubbish seriously enough to reply at length.
> The final line suggests the writer has no serious inte
On Friday 06 January 2006 09:37, Duncan wrote:
> Well, for that matter, "distribution" is considered at least by my *BSD
> friends, to be a peculiarly Linux term. From their perspective, Linux has
> 1001 "distributions", but they only have the one *BSD they choose to use.
That's what we started ch
Given the lack of interest manifested by mips team regarding
net-proxy/squid and its security bumps, I propose to remove the last
mips-stable version of this package - 2.5.10-r2 - marked as such by
hardave on September the 4th 2005.
Objections anyone?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
Try #2, following the suggestion in
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20201#c11
x11-misc/bbapm: Bug 20201, segfaults, last release 6 years ago (a.k.a. dead
as a nail in the lamp-room door)
Unless someone steps up, it'll be package masked in two weeks and removed from
portage.
--
Best reg
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:00 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> On 06/01/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Probably better to iron out what y'all actually need and what the dev
> > community is willing to put up with.
> >
> > Eg, would do some research into it, read the archives from
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
> OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
> emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
> makes Gentoo great at what it does today, that such efforts should be
> separate from Gentoo itself
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò posted
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below,
on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 12:23:52 +0100:
> On Friday 06 January 2006 09:37, Duncan wrote:
>> Well, for that matter, "distribution" is considered at least by my *BSD
>> friends, to be a peculiarly Linux term. From their perspective
On Friday 06 January 2006 16:15, Duncan wrote:
> And I definitely wish you well in your G/FBSD efforts, but when I
> mentioned them on my local ISP's unix (*ix) group, the FBSD groupies
> reaction was "Yuck!"
Same for FreeBSD devs that tries to hinder us. But why? They think to be the
keeper of T
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
>
>>OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
>>emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
>>makes Gentoo great at what it does today, that such efforts should be
You better bring this up on the gentoo-alt mailing list. Please
consider posting it there instead of going in a private discussion.
On 06-01-2006 08:15:42 -0700, Duncan wrote:
> And I definitely wish you well in your G/FBSD efforts, but when I
> mentioned them on my local ISP's unix (*ix) group,
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 08:15:42AM -0700, Duncan wrote:
>
> Tell me, from someone who obviously has some FBSD experience, what
> advantages does Gentoo/FreeBSD have over the normal FreeBSD? Why would
> someone use it who is currently using regular FreeBSD, and why are you
> spending the time? Th
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> * Removed --ask message, apparently it's superfluous.
Why? I haven't found any conclusion about that in the last thread. It
doesn't make sense to show the message in both `emerge -p foo` and
`emerge foo`, but not in `emerge -a foo`, IMHO.
WKR,
-jkt
--
cd /local/pub && m
On Friday 06 January 2006 16:27, Lance Albertson wrote:
> As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
> the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro.
This has nothing to with open-mindness, but having enough people doing the
general maintenance of a cl
Lance Albertson wrote: [Fri Jan 06 2006, 09:27:23AM CST]
> As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
> the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro. There are
> too many things that would get in the way of Gentoo proper to make it
> work right. I agree
Jan Kundrát posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 17:10:52 +0100:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> * Removed --ask message, apparently it's superfluous.
>
> Why? I haven't found any conclusion about that in the last thread. It
> doesn't make sense to show the message in bot
Duncan wrote:
> My thinking too, until I saw the portage dev (JStubbs?) mention it wasn't
> needed.
>
> I believe the thinking is that emerge --ask is basically emerge --pretend
> with an opportunity to continue stuck on the end, thus eliminating running
> the same command only without the --prete
Grobian posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 16:33:46 +0100:
[reply to my question on the purpose of G/FBSD]
> You better bring this up on the gentoo-alt mailing list. Please
> consider posting it there instead of going in a private discussion.
You sure you want my
Duncan wrote: [Fri Jan 06 2006, 09:15:42AM CST]
> Tell me, from someone who obviously has some FBSD experience, what
> advantages does Gentoo/FreeBSD have over the normal FreeBSD? Why would
> someone use it who is currently using regular FreeBSD, and why are you
> spending the time? There are obv
Grant Goodyear wrote: [Fri Jan 06 2006, 10:46:55AM CST]
> Addressing your point about Enterprise Gentoo, I think you're probably
> right about it needing focus, direction, and a leader, but that's quite
> different from needing Gentoo as a whole to have any of those. The
> Gentoo *BSD work is a go
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:27:23AM -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
> >
> >>OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
> >>emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with wh
When emerging wxGTK-2.4.2-r4 on alpha I get a QA message about
executable stacks ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/113119#c10 ). I read the
GNU Stack Quickstart (
http://gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml ). However, I
couldn't find any assembly files for wxGTK (ls -R | grep S$ only
returns NEWS), no
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:00 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> > On 06/01/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Probably better to iron out what y'all actually need and what the dev
> > > community is willing to put
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lance Albertson wrote:
| As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
| the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro. There are
| too many things that would get in the way of Gentoo proper to make it
| work
Lance Albertson wrote:
I never meant that each subproject can't have their own goals. They need
to have those of course! I was more directed that there isn't a person
in charge of all the subprojects just to keep track of them (Not
governing them). i.e. if subproject foo is working on adding feat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jon Portnoy wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 01:37:45AM -0700, Duncan wrote:
|
|>What word to use in place of "distribution", when one wants to include the
|>BSDs and other "non-distributions" as well, other than
|>Linux/BSD[/*ix]][/OSX], or simply *i
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:27 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
> >
> >>OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
> >>emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
> >>
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:19 +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Friday 06 January 2006 16:27, Lance Albertson wrote:
> > As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
> > the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro.
>
> This has nothing to with open-mindne
First off, let me just say that this was just an idea I'd cooked up a
while back, so I am sure there's lots of holes in it for you guys to rip
apart. Anyway, without further ado...
The proposal is quite simple insofar as it requires no changes to
portage, whatsoever (though there are possibilitie
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:39 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
> Automation can reduce workload, within limits. Fex, scripting for
> yanking packages/deptree out of normal tree for merging into a g19
> tree.
Exactly, though I am not sure GLEP19 is the right way to go anyway, as
it still put a decent a
Fellow devs,
I know this thread is getting long, but to ensure we get the right closure
I'd like to ensure that there is a consensus summary and action plan.
That said, the interpretation below is just my own, but I've tried to be
as neutral as possible given that I've been a proponent of moderat
Matthew Marlowe wrote:
> 1) enterprise devs form their own mailing list and/or herd and spend the
> next several
> weeks attempting to come up with a consensus on a GLEP that might
> realistically
> address their needs. There is no need for the details to be worked out on
> the -dev
> ml. On
Is there anyone maintaining dev-libs/dietlibc ?
devs who contributed/touched the ebuilds:
- Michael Hanselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Daniel Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Michael Sterrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If no one complains, I'l
Jan Kundrát posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:02:57 +0100:
> Duncan wrote:
>> My thinking too, until I saw the portage dev (JStubbs?) mention it wasn't
>> needed.
>>
>> I believe the thinking is that emerge --ask is basically emerge --pretend
>> with an opportun
Grant Goodyear posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted
below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 11:10:11 -0600:
> Most of the things that people like about Gentoo have little to do with
> the underlying C library, kernel, and userland. Instead, it's portage,
> sane configuration files, and dependency-based star
I'm thinking about adding the srvdir[1] global useflag.
Scream if I miss some discussion preventing it.
(fenice[2] will use it, that's why I'm adding it)
lu
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0020.html#implementation
[2] http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=fenice
--
Luca Barb
Thomas Cort wrote:
> When emerging wxGTK-2.4.2-r4 on alpha I get a QA message about
> executable stacks ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/113119#c10 ). I read the
> GNU Stack Quickstart (
> http://gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml ). However, I
> couldn't find any assembly files for wxGTK (ls -R | g
Chris Gianelloni posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
excerpted below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:18:58 -0500:
> Remember that the release trees would only be security fixes. No other
> package updates should be happening. This would allow for companies to
> actually certify their software against "Gentoo 2
On Mon, 2006-01-02 at 23:00 +0100, Danny van Dyk wrote:
> Please help me to welcome Tobias Matzat aka SirSeoman who just entered
> the ranks of Gentoo Developers. Tobias is our new German GWN Translator.
>
> He is 25 years old and lives in Trier where he studies computer science
> at the Trier Uni
Chris Gianelloni posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
excerpted below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:30:28 -0500:
> Perhaps a good explanation of the binpkg format would be in order to
> give us a chance to determine what could/should be changed?
As I regularly use the binpkg features on packages I've build wit
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 11:25:57PM +0100, Tobias Scherbaum wrote:
> Yo, Welcome Tobias!
Oh no, not another Tobias!
Welcome++
Wernfried
--
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org
IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gento
On Fri, 2006-06-01 at 09:39 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:00 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> > > On 06/01/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 1) Manpower. There are already 10,000 open bu
On Friday 06 January 2006 16:13, Christian Heim wrote:
> devs who contributed/touched the ebuilds:
> - Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> - Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
i regret ever touching this package ... and i'm pretty sure Ned feels the same
way ... i'm 100% uClibc now ;)
> If no one com
On Friday 06 January 2006 08:07, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Given the lack of interest manifested by mips team regarding
> net-proxy/squid and its security bumps, I propose to remove the last
> mips-stable version of this package - 2.5.10-r2 - marked as such by
> hardave on September the 4th 2005.
>
> Ob
On Friday 06 January 2006 12:30, Thomas Cort wrote:
> When emerging wxGTK-2.4.2-r4 on alpha I get a QA message about
> executable stacks ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/113119#c10 ). I read the
> GNU Stack Quickstart (
> http://gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml ).
well you didnt read far enough d
Duncan wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> excerpted below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:30:28 -0500:
>
>
>>Perhaps a good explanation of the binpkg format would be in order to
>>give us a chance to determine what could/should be changed?
>
>
> As I regularly use the binpkg featu
Duncan wrote: [Wed Jan 04 2006, 02:49:39PM EST]
> Forget formal logic, it still "begs the question", in that it "begs
> that the question be asked".
No, the reason you used the expression "begs the question" is because
it sounds familiar to you. Otherwise you would have said something
like "bri
Aron Griffis wrote:
> Duncan wrote: [Wed Jan 04 2006, 02:49:39PM EST]
>
>>Forget formal logic, it still "begs the question", in that it "begs
>>that the question be asked".
>
>
> No, the reason you used the expression "begs the question" is because
> it sounds familiar to you. Otherwise you wou
Hello Christian
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 10:13:39PM +0100, Christian Heim wrote:
> devs who contributed/touched the ebuilds:
> - Michael Hanselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> If no one complains, I'll take this package.
I don't mind if you do that.
Greets,
Michael
--
Gentoo Linux Developer using m0
Mike Frysinger wrote:
>On Friday 06 January 2006 08:07, Alin Nastac wrote:
>
>
>>Given the lack of interest manifested by mips team regarding
>>net-proxy/squid and its security bumps, I propose to remove the last
>>mips-stable version of this package - 2.5.10-r2 - marked as such by
>>hardave on
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006 10:19 am, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 06 January 2006 16:13, Christian Heim wrote:
> > devs who contributed/touched the ebuilds:
> > - Ned Ludd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > - Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> i regret ever touching this package ... and i'm pretty sure Ned f
54 matches
Mail list logo
