Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: codergeek42
On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 14:25 -0500, Curtis Napier wrote: > Welcome codergeek! I'm his mentor so everyone wish him *lots* of luck, > he's gonna need it. LOL Jeez thanks for the wonderful encouragement, Curtis. Ha ha. :-P -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] In Southern Cali Area
On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 12:45 +0900, Chris White wrote: > To all who care (other folks feel free to keep your procmail aliases you have > setup for me), > > I'll be in the ventura county area from Sunday February 5th to Monday > February 6th for a job interview. Since the interview is monday, and I > arrive at about 12 at my hotel, I'll have some free time to kill (as will I > from ~2-7 monday after the interview). Those interested parties in meeting > me (remember to renew all insurance policies) feel free to contact me off > list to plan something. I'll have my GPG key on a super ghetto piece of > paper for signing purposes, as well as 30 forms of ID linked to me and my 400 > aliases. Hmm I live in the Anaheim/Fullerton area. Unfortunately I've got stuff planned which takes up pretty much all of my free time Sunday and I've got work on Monday. Oh well. Another time, it must seem, Chris. =) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] New forums staffer: kernelsensei (Boris Fersing)
On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 22:48 +0100, Wernfried Haas wrote: > Boris is one of the people taking care of the French forum and now has > joined the official Gentoo ranks. > > He writes about himself: > My name is Boris Fersing, I'm 20 years old, French and live on the > French-German border. I study Computational Linguistics at the > University of Saarland (Germany). My hobbies are Psychology, japanese > culture, martial arts (like Iaido), beer and of course Gentoo ;) Welcome to the team, Boris! :-] -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7; Fingerprint: 0629 F604 3C14 937E F088 E5E9 B3CB 48EC DA36 34D7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Gentoo doc developer: Josh Saddler (nightmorph)
Another Southern Californian, it would seem. Excellent. If you're ever in the Anaheim/Orange County Area give me a jingle. We could go for some Starbucks and head to Fry's or something. :P Welcome aboard, Josh! -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7; Fingerprint: 0629 F604 3C14 937E F088 E5E9 B3CB 48EC DA36 34D7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Staffer: Christel Dahlskjaer
Awesome! Welcome aboard, Christel! :-) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key: 0xDA3634D7; Fingerprint: 0629 F604 3C14 937E F088 E5E9 B3CB 48EC DA36 34D7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for some CD/DVD-recording applications
Philip Webb wrote: Please keep Xcdroast in Portage: I use it & it has no bugs AFAIK. It depends on cdrecord-prodvd, which means that it will have to be converted to use the new cdrtools if it's to continue being useful since cdrecord-prodvd is being masked (and some time thereafter, removed). No recent updates ? -- that applies to many packages in Portage. Not having recent updates is one thing, but with a dead upstream, there is no place to send security patches or bug fixes or add new functionality as needed, etc. (Unless of course, someone were to fork the current codebase and pick up where they left off.) Better tools ? -- please name them & give reasons. There is K3b (a Qt app), Graveman (a GTK2 app), NeroLinux (GTK+ 1.x, non-Free), GnomeBaker (GTK2/GNOME) and probably several others which provide the same functionality yet are actively maintained and supported with a proper upstream. My $0.02... -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for some CD/DVD-recording applications
Philip Webb wrote: Peter Gordon wrote: It depends on cdrecord-prodvd Not on my system (which I just eix-synced): I have a working Xcdroast, but have never had Cdrecord-prodvd; no, I don't have a DVD writer (yet). Mea culpa. I didn't realize that it had been changed from this. Thanks. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Future developer
George Prowse wrote: I forgot to say that you could call your daughter Jennifer because you could name her "Jen two". George ...and a rimshot is heard fading in the distance. Congrats, Paul! ^_^ -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Yet Another Victim
Welcome, Yuval! :D -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: joslwah
Bryan Østergaard wrote: Joshua Ross (joslway) joined the Gentoo/PPC64 team a couple weeks ago. He'll be helping with release engineering among other things. [...] Welcome aboard, Joshua! :D -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] I'm "frilled" to present to you, a new Gentoo developer
Sven Vermeulen wrote: [...] You get a good 'old welcome from me, Wolf. Welcome. From me as well. Welcome aboard, Wolf! :D -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Gentoo's Social Contract & Bugzilla (was: "Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for August")
Matthew Marlowe wrote: > If we could get a license donated, my vote would be to switch to Atlassian > Jira, http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira. It seems to be gaining > mindshare rather quickly, and the company I work for just shelled out $2,400 > because they liked it so much more than RT/Bugzilla. I believe it supports > multiple DB backends, including all the usual suspects. Maybe it's just me, but I think that having such a core component of the distribution be proprietary is in complete violation of Gentoo's Social Contract[1] (if not the letter of it, then its spirit of openness). It states: "Gentoo will never never depend upon a piece of software or metadata unless it conforms to the GNU General Public License, the GNU Lesser General Public License, the Creative Commons - Attribution/Share Alike or some other license approved by the Open Source Initiative (OSI)." Isn't this one of the driving reasons why our forums run phpBB instead of something like vBulletin, for example? :) [1] http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo's Social Contract & Bugzilla
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > In the past, it's been more or less agreed that it's not depending > upon it if it uses an open data format... There was talk of moving the > forums to proprietary software at one point, for example. I see. Thanks for the clarification, Ciaran. (Though as an aside, I'd like to mention that it'd still be a bad idea to do so. :P) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo's Social Contract & Bugzilla
Luis Francisco Araujo wrote: > I think it is perfectly valid we use this kind of tools for development; > as far as i know, our SC refers to those components (in form of software > and metadata) to be free software upon which a user depend to build a > Gentoo system, and this isn't one of those components. Though i admit it > might bring some kind of 'controversy' . I've got no problem with people wanting to actively use proprietary software instead of F/OSS alternatives because of much better features, security record, etc. (Here's where that phpBB vs vBulletin example comes to mind again.) Heck, it's their choice, right? My quarrel is with the fact that this would be the designated tool for full development usage and whatnot. However, I don't believe that Bugzilla is such a separate entity from the distribution as a whole. I, for one, would simply stop reporting bugs there if it was switched to a proprietary bug-tracking tool. Now, one could say that this isn't much of a problem (since it's all entirely voluntary, right?); but think of this on a grander scale of other F/OSS advocates: you would have much less community involvement. One of the core foundations, as I see it, of a community-driven Linux distribution such as Gentoo is exactly that: the community. Bugzilla provides a reasonably-somewhat-sane infrastructure to keep track of the various bugs, issues, and feature requests being put forth by its users and is one of the primary methods of communication between the user and developer camps. Regards. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New(-ish) developer - Elfyn McBratney
Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: > I of course am thrilled, not only did we (re-)gain another UK based dev, > but a UK based dev with a great taste in music, a sick and twisted mind > and the ability to put up with me singing. Welcome back, Elfyn! Awesome. Welcome aboard, Elfyn! -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] use.force as a complement to use.mask in profiles
Zac Medico wrote: > The difference with use.force is that it prevents flags, that are deemed > extremely important, from being accidentally disabled by the user. If they were so "extremely important" then they would not be optional, and hence not even be USE flags at all, no? Or am I missing something? -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] use.force as a complement to use.mask in profiles
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 21:39:46 -0700 Peter Gordon > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | If they were so "extremely important" then they would not be optional, > | and hence not even be USE flags at all, no? Or am I missing something? > > You're missing something. Vim used to have an ncurses USE flag, that > would switch it between using ncurses and termcap-compat. On some > archs, only ncurses was available, so some way was needed to force > the use flag. > That's a nice counterexample. Thanks for the explanation. :) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Forums Staff : jmbsvicetto
Shyam Mani wrote: [...] > So, throw up the usual parties, say hello when you meet him and make him > feel at home :) So it's official now? Yay! Welcome aboard, Jorge! :D -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] council voting reminder
Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 28 August 2006 14:50, Tuan Van wrote: >> where do I get "I voted" sticker? > > http://www.cafepress.com/spankgentoo.13531918 > -mike BWHAHAHAHAHAHWHHWAHHAHHAHA That's so great! :D -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] cdrtools license issues
Carsten Lohrke wrote: > Imho we have to remove the partly and incompatible relicensed > cdrtools-2.01.01 > alpha ebuilds from the tree. I completely agree. In fact, Fedora Development also had to revert this change due to the same licensing issues a couple of weeks ago. (See the thread spawned from the 20060817 rawhide report [1].) There are also the dvdrtools [2] fork of it as well as libburn [3] (which, as I understand it, has a bunch of wrapper scripts to be able to interpret and implement various of its functionality, thus (mostly) suitable a drop-in replacement for cdrtools. [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-August/msg00644.html [2] http://www.arklinux.org/projects/dvdrtools [3] http://icculus.org/burn/ -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] cdrtools license issues
Greg KH wrote: >> I completely agree. In fact, Fedora Development also had to revert this >> change >> due to the same licensing issues a couple of weeks ago. (See the thread >> spawned >> from the 20060817 rawhide report [1].) > > No, they had to do this because they are distributing a built binary, > same as Debian. We don't do that, so there is no issue for us[1]. See > my other response in this thread for details. > > [1] As long as we take the binary off the live cd and the install image. Thanks for the clarification, Greg. :) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer - Vlastimil Babka
Welcome, Vlastimil! :) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New libcaca license
Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten wrote: > So, I was working on updating libcaca to 0.99_bea4 version, but there's a new > license to add, and I'd liek to know if anybody has a problem with this ... > > http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/ > > -- Diego, The "DO WHAT THE FUCK YOU WANT" license is apparently a perfectly valid (though amusing) Free software license, according to an old post [1] on the debian-legal list. Thus, I see no reason for no qualms against its terms. []1 http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/09/msg00032.html -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: tuxracer/tuxracer-demo
Chris Gianelloni wrote: > games-arcade/tuxracer - the last open source version of the game > games-arcade/tuxracer-demo - the demo for the closed-source version > Good riddance, I say. ppracer for the win! :) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: David Shakaryan (omp)
Christian Heim wrote: > [..] > So please welcome David as a new fellow developer among us! Welcome aboard, ompy. Now we can discuss openbox-related packaging tips together. ^_^ -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] Developer retirement
Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Why don't you use Reply All or Reply to List, like everyone else? Well, if the mailing list sent a proper Reply-To header in its messages, we wouldn't really be having this thread, right? :) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Devrel Subproject: Gentoo Devmatch
David Shakaryan wrote: > Alec Warner wrote: >> Developers volunteer to dual off against other developers (including >> retired developers!) in the ring. > > Good luck, Ciaran! :) I move that spb be his opponent on this duel. *runs away* -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Call For Interest: Scale5x
I'm in the northern part of Orange County, so this is a rather small trip for me to get there. Assuming all is well, I may (hopefully) be able to attend at least one of the days! Woo! -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Call For Interest: Scale5x
On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 16:41 -0800, David Shakaryan wrote: > Although I'm not completely sure yet, I am assuming that I should be > able to attend, as I live only ~25 miles away from LAX. Looking forward > to it. :) Lunch at BURGER KING. Awesome. :D -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for November
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 08:40 +, 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. I have one item that I would like to see addressed in the next possible council meeting: The reply behavior of gentoo-core messages. What's happening is that gentoo-core appears to have no default Reply-To header set. This issue I feel needs to be addressed for two major reasons: Firstly, with no explicit Reply-To address, most mail clients default to replying to the sender of the message. This means that, for people who use such clients must manually replace the To: address in their reply composition. Unfortunately, there have been prior instances of a dev accidentally replying to the -core list on -dev. This means that the conversation intended to stay private and internal to Gentoo suddenly is in the public eye and many archives. This will inevitably occur if such behavior is not resolved. Secondly, every other Gentoo mailing list that I am subscribed to (g-dev, g-devrel, g-gwn) adds a Reply-To header which instructs the dev's MUA to default to replying to the list address, rather than to the individual sender of the message to which they reply. Unfortunately, gentoo-core is the only list which does not follow this behavior. I would appreciate the council voting on making this behavior consistent: Force gentoo-core to add this header, or remove it from the other mailing lists. Thanks. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for November
On Sun, 2006-11-05 at 04:57 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > i dont see anyone talking to infra about it so why dont you start there > -mike Will do. Thanks, Mike. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ The gentoo-core list configuration is broken, and infra knowingly leave it so. I guess their only consistency is inconsistency itself... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] The long story behind our new developer: Peter Weller (welp)
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 14:59 +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> Now you know the story behind our new amd64/bugday/xfce dev from UK. I
> think he deserves the usual happy welcome :)
/bin/bash -c 'echo Wel{come,p}.'
:]
--
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
Gentoo Forums Global Moderator
GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint:
DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479
My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Introducing Daniel Robbins (drobbins)
Welcome back, Daniel! :] -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) / FSF Associate Member #5015 Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo: static/dynamic linking libraries
On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 23:50 +0200, Rémi Cardona wrote: > Open Question part: > > Since I don't have any thing other than Gentoo : does anyone know how > other distros handle static libs in their -dev packages? Fedora's policy [1] is to only include static libraries when absolutely necessary, such as with libpci or other libraries that ship *only* static incarnations (though in these cases the packager is heavily encouraged to pester the upstream developer(s) about building a shared library as well); or for specific exceptions where full and satisfactory reason is given for the inclusion of static libraries (such as, perhaps, low-level rescue utilities like grub and others, though they generally then need to explicitly be in a foo-static subpackage when built). All such cases need to be approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee (FESCo). > Does anyone care about static libs except for maybe really really low > level stuff? They are useful for rescue operations and whatnot, when a LiveCD or similar is not handy; or perhaps when the computer cannot boot from an alternative medium. That's the only major benefit I see of them. > My Opinion part: > > I'd definitely would like to see them leave my system for good as I have > no use for 99% of them whatsoever. ++ > Open Question part: > > Could some FEATURE disable static libs building by default in desktop > profiles, with some (like the 5 packages Roman pointed out) using > something like a RESTRICT? > Back when I used Gentoo (mid-2003 through Nov. 2005), I remember there being a "-static" flag that could be set. I don't remember if that was in FEATURES or USE though; and not all ebuilds honored it. :| Is there similar functionality in modern Portage? [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) / FSF & EFF Member Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ion license
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 00:41 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: > Well, one could ask why we should provide ebuild for stuff that has > apparently insane upstream, instead of just dropping such junk until the > upstream guy realizes that the world doesn't spin around him. But if we did this, we'd have no cdrecord. ;) -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) / FSF & EFF Member Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: ion license
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 01:19 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Supporting this would be a huge policy violation, and not so merely as > a technicality. I suggest simply removing ion support from the main > tree, and sticking it in an overlay that comes with a big warning > telling users that they cannot expect any level of QA for those > packages. Could we not simply rename it, as has been suggested many times thus far? Then we could mask ion3 and let people know why and what it was renamed to, et al. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) / FSF & EFF Member Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Inotify and (f)crontabs
On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 04:23 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > you missed a critical aspect: offline time. the way run-crons is > implemented, > if you happen to routinely shut your machine off at the time that the cronjob > is supposed to fire, then the standard you proposed will pretty much never > fire. the run-crons implementation however has a pretty good guarantee that > the periodic crons will get fired at the next uptime opportunity. Isn't this perfectly what anacron is intended for? -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 13:24 -0700, Mike Doty wrote: > We're going to change the -dev mailing list from completely open to where only > devs can post, but any dev could moderate a non-dev post. devs who moderate > in > bad posts will be subject to moderation themselves. in addition the > gentoo-project list will be created to take over what -dev frequently becomes. > there is no requirement to be on this new list. > We're voting on this next council meeting so if you have input, now would be > the time. [ Long rant ahead, perhaps some of which may or may not quite as accurate as intended since I've not been following Gentoo's development as closely as I should have over the past few months. ] Quite frankly, this (if passed) will be Gentoo's deathbed moment, and this mail will be one of my last from an official Gentoo account. For far too long the mailing lists, IRC channels, and other media of developer communication have been ridden with belligerent, inconsiderate, and often-accusatory postings. However, instead of removing the few who cause most (if not all) of this damage to Gentoo, we are further restricting its development. I fail to see how such restriction will aide us in any way. We already have the gentoo-core mailing list, and anything needing to be kept internal to developer-only discussion should be sent there. Yes, stuff is leaked from time to time, but Gentoo's developer handbook [1] explicitly states that "gentoo-core is to be used for internal discussions." Thus, those who leak information that is not to be made public should be disciplined accordingly. Instead, we (the entire developer community) simply continue to let things of this nature occur, and persist in adding layers of bureaucracy in order to pretend to ourselves that this is much less harmful to us than it verily is. Yes, that's what this amounts to: bureaucracy. We are simply adding more process and protocol to the posting by non-developers. How can we say that devs won't discard what may have otherwise been great discussions of introspection or other aspects of our development? How can we ensure that developers with personal vendettas [2] won't use this moderation power as a form of attack against the developer in question or the community as a whole? Wait, what's this: Oh I see. We discipline them. What does this accomplish? It adds another point of reason for possible disciplinary action at the expense of furthering development and hindering discussion. As a moderator of Gentoo's forums for nearly two years (and a moderator on a few other forums since about three years prior to this), I know from experience that such moderation should be in terms of a blacklist - whereby all posts and content are accepted and those which violate the rules disciplined. Having a whitelist - where only permitted content is accepted and others moderated in - is far too troublesome for this. Aside from the issues I noted above, who's to say which posts are "good" or "bad" in the first place? Who will ensure that posts are moderated in a timely and reasonable manner? Gentoo's goal of being community-driven was in our reach once.. Nay, we _were_ a community when I first started with Gentoo several years ago now: users, developers, infrastructure hackers, designers - nearly *everyone* was contributing back to the community in a way: mailing list or forums support, bug reporting/triaging, ebuild submission, et al. Now, where do we stand? That community has fallen so much that we need another group (User Reps.) to act as an intermediary between them. More and more people are interested in development of Gentoo. They _want_ to help develop Gentoo or contribute to it in a significant way; yet all of this is just one more item to preclude such people from their contributions. Let me repeat that just to make it perfectly clear: WE ARE PUSHING AWAY POTENTIAL STAFF. But I digress.. In effect, you (the devs) are now telling others (potential contributors) what we can and cannot say on the list. While I understand that nothing about Gentoo grants me a protected right to freedom of speech or expression in any way, this reeks of heavy censorship to me. I, for one, will personally stand against any such action on this list. If it comes down to it, I will personally approve _any_ non-spam posting to this list by _anyone_ for the sake of civil disobedience. I encourage others to take similar action. This type of administration cannot be allowed to establish itself as proper or "just" in any way. [1] http://gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=1&chap=3 [2] Don't disagree with this outright: I know many, including myself, have a strong mutual dislike with one or more developers from this and other distributions though we may refrain from admittance thereto. It's part of our human psyche
Re: [gentoo-dev] ML changes
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 23:41 -0700, Peter Gordon wrote: > For far too long the mailing lists, IRC channels, and other media of > developer communication have been ridden with belligerent, > inconsiderate, and often-accusatory postings. However, instead of > removing the few who cause most (if not all) of this damage to Gentoo, > we are further restricting its development. I retract this comment in its entirety. Soon after I sent this email, I spoke with some other devs who have confirmed that the lists and whatnot have been polite for the most part as of recently. The rest of my mail still holds... -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] x86 toolchain changes heads up
On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 19:47 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > historically, gcc on x86 has always defaulted to i386. some people noticed > recently that glibc-2.6 fails to build in this situation as they were only > setting -mtune via CFLAGS, not -march. i'll be tweaking gcc so that it will > default -march based on your CHOST. so all the i686-* people will now have a > default -march=i686 implied in their gcc systems, i586-* people will > have -march=i586, etc... keep in mind this is merely the default. > -mike Does this mean that any user-set "-march" flag is overridden for these cases? Just curious. Thanks. -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] x86 toolchain changes heads up
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 01:53 -0700, Peter Gordon wrote: > Does this mean that any user-set "-march" flag is overridden for these > cases? Just curious. Thanks for the explanations given, Mike, Ioannis, Ryan, and Andre! I'm much clearer on the isue now. :] -- Peter Gordon (codergeek42) Gentoo Forums Global Moderator GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint: DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479 My Blog: http://thecodergeek.com/blog/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo Linux preinstalled
On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 12:53 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > And LiveCD installers is nice, but what I need is a Sysprep-Installer > like when someone turns on his windows PC the first time, where you > can setuo hostname/user/password and maybe network. > Is anything like that available for Linux? Fedora has something called firstboot[1]. Perhaps, with some alterations and tweaking, that it could help you? [1] http://tinyurl.com/b898t -- ~ Peter Gordon ~ GnuPG Public Key ID: 0x87C59026 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
