Chris Gianelloni wrote:
To facilitate "enterprise" usage, we break up the releases into a
"desktop" and "server" set. This means the current
"default-linux/$arch/2006.0" profile would be
"default-linux/$arch/2006.0/desktop" with a
"default-linux/$arch/2006.0/server" profile, also. The stages w
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
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 (th
On 1/8/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 01:18:20PM +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote:> Duncan wrote:> > Because that code will be implemented in portage, and the portage dev> > likely to implement it said it was a superfluous reference. =8^)
> >> > Still, I'd prefer it re
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.
As a member of the MIPS team, I take o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stuart Herbert wrote:
| I agree that some cleaning is needed (and some of my packages are
| desperate for it!), but I'm totally opposed to this idea. I think the
| idea of shutting up shop for three months (presumably with a "closed
| for refurbishme
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 01:15:22 +0100
Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I'm too late for this month, but want to put it on the table
> before I forget about it. I'd appreciate a three months moratorium,
> disallowing everyone to add new packages to the tree (despite new
> dependencie
On 1/8/06, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I'm too late for this month, but want to put it on the table before I
> forget about it. I'd appreciate a three months moratorium, disallowing
> everyone to add new packages to the tree (despite new dependencies of
> existing packages),
Yo.
Shouldn't be an issue unless you're doing something crazy, but the
DISTDIR var exported to ebuilds will now point to an intermediate
directory; all files stated via SRC_URI will be symlinks pointing back
to the actual file in DISTDIR.
Why? Well prior to this modification, it was possible
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 01:18:20PM +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
> > Because that code will be implemented in portage, and the portage dev
> > likely to implement it said it was a superfluous reference. =8^)
> >
> > Still, I'd prefer it referenced just for definition's sake, but when t
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 01:15:22AM +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Sunday 01 January 2006 06:30, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > Keep in mind that every resubmission to the council for review must
> > first be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list 7 days (minimum) before
> > being submitted as an agenda
On Sunday 01 January 2006 06:30, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> Keep in mind that every resubmission to the council for review must
> first be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list 7 days (minimum) before
> being submitted as an agenda item which itself occurs 7 days before the
> meeting. Simply put, the g
Hi,
On 1/6/06, Grant Goodyear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Absolutely true. That said, there's relatively little resistance to the
> concept of Enterprise Gentoo, as far as I know. There is substantial
> resistance to anything that might add additional work to
> already-overwhelmed package maint
On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 05:24:52PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 01:56:03PM +0530, Shyam Mani wrote:
> > [2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/modular-x-howto.xml
>
> You mean:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/x/x11/modular-x-howto.xml
> right?
FYI, I converted over my n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stefaan wrote:
| I don't use pmount myself, but my guess is that /media is just a
| directory that contains mountpoints, and which remains at all time
| writeable for root. /afs is not writeable when mounted, just like
| /dev/cdrom etc...
That's actu
On 1/7/06, Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefaan wrote:
> > The obvious solution seems to do "keepdir", so portage would attempt
> > to make the directory and put a .keep file in there. I say attempt,
> > because the following problem will occur during an re-merge or
> > upgrade, while
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Stefaan wrote:
>
>>Hi!
>>
>>I'm having an issue with the openafs-ebuild, and I don't see a
>>solution for the moment. I wondered if someone on the list would:
>>
>>Prerequisite:
>>The ebuild needs to create the /afs directory, and remove that same
>>directory when it is unins
Stefaan wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm having an issue with the openafs-ebuild, and I don't see a
> solution for the moment. I wondered if someone on the list would:
>
> Prerequisite:
> The ebuild needs to create the /afs directory, and remove that same
> directory when it is uninstalled.
>
> The obvious
Stefaan wrote:
You suggest keeping the /afs dir, this would be an easy solution of
course, but it does seem untidy, doesn't it? (Makes me think of the
windows uninstallers saying "not all files could be removed, have a
nice day")
Ah, I of course didn't pay enough attention and didn't reali
On 1/7/06, Brian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could handle it the way the baselayout ebuild does.
But baselayout also just creates the directories in pkg_postinst (if
my interpretation of the ebuild is correct). The list is not kept, so
when uninstalling baselayout the directories are
On 1/7/06, Joshua Baergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why not just create the directory in ${D} or ${IMAGE} and let Portage
> handle the rest? Do you really want to be removing /afs unconditionally
> on unmerge?
Because this results in this: (directory /t existed and /dev/cdrom was
mounted to it
You could handle it the way the baselayout ebuild does.
--Iggy
Stefaan wrote:
Hi!
I'm having an issue with the openafs-ebuild, and I don't see a
solution for the moment. I wondered if someone on the list would:
Prerequisite:
The ebuild needs to create the /afs directory, and remove that same
Stefaan wrote:
Prerequisite:
The ebuild needs to create the /afs directory, and remove that same
directory when it is uninstalled.
Why not just create the directory in ${D} or ${IMAGE} and let Portage
handle the rest? Do you really want to be removing /afs unconditionally
on unmerge?
Josh
Duncan wrote:
> Because that code will be implemented in portage, and the portage dev
> likely to implement it said it was a superfluous reference. =8^)
>
> Still, I'd prefer it referenced just for definition's sake, but when the
> portage dev says it isn't a superfluous reference, and that parti
Hi!
I'm having an issue with the openafs-ebuild, and I don't see a
solution for the moment. I wondered if someone on the list would:
Prerequisite:
The ebuild needs to create the /afs directory, and remove that same
directory when it is uninstalled.
The obvious solution seems to do "keepdir", so
Hi all.
Sorry about the late announcement but today is the monthly Bugday :) I
hope we'll still see a lot of people turning up in #gentoo-bugs on
irc.freenode.net to help squash some bugs and have a fun time with other
gentoo users and/or devs.
Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Drake Wyrm posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted
below, on Sat, 07 Jan 2006 01:59:23 -0800:
> http://qwantz.com/index.pl?comic=693
Apropos indeed. Thanks!
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 05:26:44 -0700 Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | That begs the question...
>
> No it doesn't.
>
> http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/begs.html
>
> | Curious users want to know!
>
> Perhaps said curious users should go and take
27 matches
Mail list logo
