Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 "Critical News Reporting" Round Two
On 11/10/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:12:28 + Stuart Herbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | Should the GLEP explain how Portage will know how many unread news > | items there are in /var/lib/gentoo/news? I couldn't spot where this > | is covered in the text, or in the example code. > > Well, I was going to go with the plain but simple "once you've read it, > delete it" approach, but some people didn't like that. Next draft will > propose being able to append .read to a filename to mark it read > without deleting it. Either way, it's just a case of looking > for -??-??-*.??.txt, chopping off the .??.txt, removing duplicates > and counting. > What about something like "/etc/portage/news.read", which contains a single news file per line. Perhaps have support for something like "<=2006-01-01" in order to be able to manually mark date ranges as read. HTH, Mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation
On 11/22/05, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Give me one example of something that you can do with a stage1 or stage2 > tarball that you cannot with a stage3 tarball. > I may not be the typical user, but I use Stage1 to build servers, because I can fit a boot image + stage1 tarball on a small usb drive, boot to that, and then I nfs mount $DISTDIR and $PORTDIR from a central server. Mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation
On 11/23/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/23/05, Mike Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I may not be the typical user, but I use Stage1 to build servers, > > because I can fit a boot image + stage1 tarball on a small usb drive, > > boot to that, and then I nfs mount $DISTDIR and $PORTDIR from a > > central server. > Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the boot image itself have nfs > built in? why a stage1 at all... > > Because I'm lazy, and used to doing the stage1 thing :) Mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
On 6/20/06, Stefan Schweizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, with kde4 approaching and the new Qt-4 being in the tree we suddenly see the same problems that gtk had with the gtk2 flag again. From this user's perspective, simple is better. qt3 and qt4 as use flags are completely and utterly obvious as to what they mean, and there is no confusion about them. Adding a plain qt flag in there brings back the gtk/gtk2 mess that we've presumably been trying to avoid in the future. Mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Are you guys for real?
On 6/13/07, Jayson Vaughn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, Gentoo is over. As an outsider who has been following gentoo-dev and other gentoo lists for a while, this is just completely nuts. Is there any order or clear idea anymore for this distro? No other distro seems to be as lost or confused as Gentoo is. And WTF is this list going to discuss development? Do you guys develop ANYTHING? Or Do you just bitch all day? Good bye Gentoo, when you grow up and know what your goals are etc I'll be back. Love the distro, but Jesus the politics and the bitching gets out. Just an observation from the outside. kthxbai Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Throwing fresh logs on the fire doesn't help (and neither did this email, but I had to say it). -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] modular X - 7.0 RC1
On 10/20/05, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Add foo to profiles, users sets -* to remove the use.defaults flags, then the > user has no foo :) > Which is exactly as it should be. If someone is going to use -*, then they should learn to live with the consequences. Even I, as a regular user know that. Mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
