Re: [gentoo-dev] Wireless driver / firmware ebuilds & wireless-tools
On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 05:06 +0100, Stroller wrote: > - as I understand it: wireless-tools to actually configure the SSID, > WEP key wpa_supplicant can do this as well which makes wireless-tools optional Roy -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Wireless driver / firmware ebuilds & wireless-tools
On May 21, 2005, at 6:25 am, Doug Goldstein wrote: Stroller wrote: Hi, . far to long. Yeah, sorry... I've always been pedantic. It's a real hard habit to shift. In summary and simple conclusion, yes you are wrong. So that makes 2 out of the 4 or 5 active Mobile herd devs who say you're wrong. Sorry again. Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean to say in my posting "I'm right", but rather I intended to ask: Surely a user who emerges prism54-firmware will depend upon wireless-tools? "The firmware itself does not depend on wireless-tools for operation. DEPEND/RDEPEND/PDEPEND in ebuilds are not for what you might want to use along with the package in question - it is for technical dependencies such as libraries and utilities." Ok... so you're saying that the way to resolve this is to have a variable called USER_WILL_DEPEND or similar? The firmware, which in 2 of these cases are in seperate packages, do not depend on wireless-tools. Y'see I'm just not getting why not. A user can install Gentoo, compile the prism54 drivers in to his kernel, emerge the prism54-firmware ebuild and not have wireless-tools. Yet having emerged the prism54-firmware the user has indicated to Portage that, yes, indeed, he intends upon using a wireless network card. As I understand it, the firmware can be uploaded to a wireless card without the wireless-tools, but nothing useful can be done with either the wireless card or the firmware without it. Are you telling me this understanding is wrong? The distinction between driver & firmware kinda dawned on me whilst writing my original email, but I don't the practical implications. The user needs wireless-tools in either case, right? Is it the case instead that using DEPEND, RDEPEND or PDEPEND would break something else if used to indicate the user's need? Hence a variable called USER_WILL_DEPEND would be more suitable? This is just melting my head, because I just don't see what I've got wrong here - both you & brix have told me so, so you must be right. Could you please explain more slowly for me? And for a last example which I just thought of... ndiswrapper acts the sameway. Considering the Windows drivers are more of a "firmware" and ndiswrapper is the driver. Mostly for ideological reasons I tend to ignore NDISwrapper, but I see that emerging it pulls in wireless-tools. This seems correct and sensible to me - by emerging NDISwrapper the user has indicated that he intends on installing a wireless card (right?), so the ebuild provides him with the tools he will need to set its SSID & WEP key. Stroller. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Wireless driver / firmware ebuilds & wireless-tools
On May 21, 2005, at 8:47 am, Roy Marples wrote: On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 05:06 +0100, Stroller wrote: - as I understand it: wireless-tools to actually configure the SSID, WEP key wpa_supplicant can do this as well which makes wireless-tools optional Ah, expletive! Please excuse my last email, then, which went from my outbox just a few seconds ago. What's the difference between wpa_supplicant & wireless-tools, then? Could ipw2200 (theoretically, as a virtual, or at some point in the future) depend upon wpa_supplicant instead? Stroller. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: xorg's RDEPEND
On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 13:14 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > emerge pxes Last time I checked this package, it didn't support XOrg X11 (only XFree86-4.3) and neither did it support linux-2.6 (only linux-2.4) - both showstoppers for me since the hardware, on which I wanted to deploy the thin clients, isn't supported by those versions. I ended up writing a small perl script for automating the build process of the thin client image instead. Sincerely, Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Naming scheme confusion
On Fri, 2005-05-20 at 15:23 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > in any case it should be _pY as your snapshot is newer than the current > version. _p stands for patch level, _pre for prerelease. In case of cvs > ebuilds patch levels are more appropriate as the new version is often not > known. Thanks - I'll keep that in mind. ./Brix -- Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] New developer: Benjamin Smee (strerror)
Hi list, I have a new developer to tell you about. He'll be joining the net-mail herd and his name is Benjamin Smee. He's an Australian by birth, but he is currently living in London and he has also lived in Berlin in the past. He works as a Unix security technician and spends most of his free time working on his home network or learning something new that's computer related. He enjoys playing some MMORPGs, but he's trying to avoid spending too much time on them and instead doing more constructive things :) Look out for him on IRC as strerror, and please welcome him to the team. Regards, Tom -- Tom Martin, http://dev.gentoo.org/~slarti AMD64, net-mail, shell-tools, vim, recruiters Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Benjamin Smee (strerror)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Tom Martin wrote: > I have a new developer to tell you about. He'll be joining the net-mail > herd and netmon too. mwuhaha :) Welcome once again Ben. - -- Anything is possible, unless it's not. Aaron Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ BSD | cron | forensics | shell-tools | commonbox | netmon | vim | web-apps ] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCj1GsC3poscuANHARApXKAKDbotP9n6c6zPxUqLf+0yFHHViTSACdHqmx ruzZtKdaW61IJOVvzGrGFKc= =TlGq -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New dev Killerfox (René NussBaumer)
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:26:40PM +0200, Tobias Scherbaum wrote: > Who else will attend "What the Hack"? > I also thought about it already, I guess I'll be there. =) And, welcome to the team Killerfox. May the juice be with you. -- Jan Brinkmann : Gentoo Developer (Amd64, Java, PPC, Sound, Video) Email: luckyduck (at) gentoo.org Web:http://the-luckyduck.de GPG:gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-key 0xE38C3BBF pgpjy5nYcwnPR.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] .keep files
Are .keep files necessary in a live filesystem? AFAIK they're only there to keep portage from removing a directory from emerge-time image. Would it be possible to just remove them from live filesystem after package files are merged to / ? Or do .keep files serve another purpose, not obvious to me? -- Andrej "Ticho" Kacian Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, amd64 pgpotXu3dTmB1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] .keep files
On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:28 +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote: > Are .keep files necessary in a live filesystem? AFAIK they're only there > to keep portage from removing a directory from emerge-time image. Would it be > possible to just remove them from live filesystem after package files are > merged to / ? > > Or do .keep files serve another purpose, not obvious to me? > I always thought that they were to keep 'emerge unmerge' from removing an empty directory, but I could be wrong... -m signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] .keep files
On Sunday 22 May 2005 05:38, marduk wrote: > On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:28 +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote: > > Are .keep files necessary in a live filesystem? AFAIK they're only there > > to keep portage from removing a directory from emerge-time image. Would > > it be possible to just remove them from live filesystem after package > > files are merged to / ? > > > > Or do .keep files serve another purpose, not obvious to me? > > I always thought that they were to keep 'emerge unmerge' from removing > an empty directory, but I could be wrong... You're pretty much right. If you look at updating a package as emerging the new version and then unmerging the old version, you'll see the reason. There is not yet any central database of installed files so unmerging the old version will find that the package installed a directory that is now empty (presumably because the files installed by that package have already been removed) and the directory is removed. Regards, Jason Stubbs pgpCtJiA1hsdd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] .keep files
marduk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:28 +0200, Andrej Kacian wrote: > > Are .keep files necessary in a live filesystem? AFAIK they're only > > there to keep portage from removing a directory from emerge-time > > image. Would it be possible to just remove them from live filesystem > > after package files are merged to / ? > > > > Or do .keep files serve another purpose, not obvious to me? > > > > I always thought that they were to keep 'emerge unmerge' from removing > an empty directory, but I could be wrong... That, and to keep portage from removing empty directories during the post-merge clean phase. Were it not for the .keep files, portage would cheerfully remove any empty directories the first time the package was upgraded. -- Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"? Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action. --Ghost in the Shell pgps9oS7fnjln.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] New Developer: dang
It's with pleasure that I announce a new developer: Dang. Dang has been working as an "Arch Tester" for AMD64 for a while now and has proven himself to be an asset to the team. So we felt it would be good to officially make him a developer. He'll be helping with amd64 bug squashing of course, along with helping out the gnome herd. Welcome dang! -- Jason Huebel Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead Gentoo Developer Relations Operational Lead Gentoo Recruiter GPG Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9BA9E230 "Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677) pgpiBzggNQ3Ly.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: dang
Jason Huebel wrote: > It's with pleasure that I announce a new developer: Dang. Dang has been > working as an "Arch Tester" for AMD64 for a while now and has proven himself > to be an asset to the team. So we felt it would be good to officially make > him a developer. He'll be helping with amd64 bug squashing of course, along > with helping out the gnome herd. > > Welcome dang! > Dang man.. it's good to have you on board dang. But dang, that's a lot of amd64 devs now. I mean.. dang... but dangit, that's ok. Welcome to the team ;). signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
