Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 31 December 2012 19:44:32 Rich Freeman wrote: > The certificates that Gentoo distributes have at least been vouched > for by somebody who is a part of our community, which is more than can > be said for most of the upstream certificates. mmm, Gentoo ships ca-certificates which comes dire

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Rich Freeman
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 9:49 PM, Michael Mol wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: >> Michael Mol gmail.com> writes: >>> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman gentoo.org> wrote: >>> > Speaking of which, say what you will about Mozilla's broken criteria >>> >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Michael Mol
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > Michael Mol gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman gentoo.org> wrote: >> > Speaking of which, say what you will about Mozilla's broken criteria >> > for root inclusion, but Mozilla has no commercial interes

[gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Michael Mol gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman gentoo.org> wrote: > > Speaking of which, say what you will about Mozilla's broken criteria > > for root inclusion, but Mozilla has no commercial interests, > > Wait, what? How does taking income during a process no

Re: [gentoo-dev] Switching order of packages in virtual/pkgconfig

2013-01-01 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Tuesday 01 January 2013 16:46:49 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > On 01/01/2013 22:29, Tony "Chainsaw" Vroon wrote: > > That sounds like a clear win. If it has survived the tinderboxing there > > likely isn't much to hold you back. As non-contentious topics sometimes > > end up with no replies at all

Re: [gentoo-dev] About using a CONFIGURATION (or SETUP) file under /usr/share/doc for configuration information

2013-01-01 Thread Zac Medico
On 01/01/2013 05:39 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El mar, 01-01-2013 a las 14:32 +0100, Pacho Ramos escribió: >> pkg_postinst() { >> @@ -48,6 +56,8 @@ >> elog >> fi >> >> +echo ${CONFIGURATION_INSTRUCTIONS} | fmt | while read -s ELINE; do >> elog "${ELINE}"; done >> + >> #

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 01 Jan 2013 17:21:18 -0500 Michael Orlitzky wrote: > Understandable, and fine with me as long as someone actually does > hand-craft them. I don't *want* to create my own local ebuilds for > these things. But you have to for most rails apps. L

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Michael Orlitzky
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/01/2013 04:53 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: > On 01/01/2013 22:12, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> >> In lieu of that, what we do is create ebuilds like >> www-apps/redmine-dependencies. I manually parse the Gemfile for >> the (R)DEPENDs. My life wo

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 01/01/2013 22:12, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > In lieu of that, what we do is create ebuilds like > www-apps/redmine-dependencies. I manually parse the Gemfile for the > (R)DEPENDs. My life would be a lot easier if we had something like > gentoo-haskell's hackport that could parse a Gemfile and

Re: [gentoo-dev] Switching order of packages in virtual/pkgconfig

2013-01-01 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
On 01/01/2013 22:29, Tony "Chainsaw" Vroon wrote: > That sounds like a clear win. If it has survived the tinderboxing there > likely isn't much to hold you back. As non-contentious topics sometimes > end up with no replies at all... consider 48 hours of radio silence an > implicit yes. It didn't s

Re: [gentoo-dev] Switching order of packages in virtual/pkgconfig

2013-01-01 Thread Tony "Chainsaw" Vroon
On Tue, 2013-01-01 at 16:01 -0500, Jeff Horelick wrote: > dev-util/pkgconf has less external dependencies, is lighter and is > faster than dev-util/pkgconfig while being now 100% compatible That sounds like a clear win. If it has survived the tinderboxing there likely isn't much to hold you back.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 02:14:17 +0700 "Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov" wrote: > Long time ago I discovered that many language-specific packages > (libraries, webapps) written on languages like PHP, Ruby, Lua and so > on has (often) almost hardcoded dependence to be installed via their > native package man

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Michael Orlitzky
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/01/2013 02:14 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: > Hi there! Long time ago I discovered that many language-specific > packages (libraries, webapps) written on languages like PHP, Ruby, > Lua and so on has (often) almost hardcoded dependence to

[gentoo-dev] Switching order of packages in virtual/pkgconfig

2013-01-01 Thread Jeff Horelick
I would like to propose a switch of the order of DEPENDs in virtual/pkgconfig to make dev-util/pkgconf[pkg-config] the default choice for new installations. dev-util/pkgconf has less external dependencies, is lighter and is faster than dev-util/pkgconfig while being now 100% compatible This switc

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Diego Elio Pettenò
If it was something feasible to do, it would have been done already. Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: > Hi there! > Long time ago I discovered that many language-specific packages >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Kent Fredric
On 2 January 2013 08:14, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote: > Hi there! > Long time ago I discovered that many language-specific packages > (libraries, webapps) written on languages like PHP, Ruby, Lua and so on > has (often) almost hardcoded dependence to be installed via their native > package man

[gentoo-dev] [brainstorm] dev-lang internal package managers and portage

2013-01-01 Thread Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov
Hi there! Long time ago I discovered that many language-specific packages (libraries, webapps) written on languages like PHP, Ruby, Lua and so on has (often) almost hardcoded dependence to be installed via their native package managers (pecl, cpan, luarocks, gem, bundler and so on). More of that, I

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
On 1/1/13 2:51 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > IMO it would probably be good to limit our CA roots to Mozilla's > libnss selection by default and perhaps add a packaged selection of > secondary CA's (like CACert) for those who are so inclined. I think that's a good idea: make it easy to only use the

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.17: nscd is optional

2013-01-01 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Saturday 29 December 2012 20:24:16 Mike Frysinger wrote: > rough poll: how many people actually care about nscd ? i'm making it into > a USE flag for glibc-2.17 and it's easiest for me to do IUSE=nscd which > means it'd default to off. sounds like people can handle this, so i've added it to 2.

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.17: nscd is optional

2013-01-01 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 31 December 2012 18:23:06 Maxim Kammerer wrote: > On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Sunday 30 December 2012 13:47:40 Maxim Kammerer wrote: > >> Desktop users would probably benefit more from glibc databases, if they > >> worked: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bu

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Michael Mol
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> The certificates that Gentoo distributes have at least been vouched >> for by somebody who is a part of our community, which is more than can >> be said for most of the upstream certifi

Re: [gentoo-dev] About using a CONFIGURATION (or SETUP) file under /usr/share/doc for configuration information

2013-01-01 Thread Pacho Ramos
El mar, 01-01-2013 a las 14:32 +0100, Pacho Ramos escribió: [...] > --- /home/pacho/gentoo-x86/sys-power/acpid/acpid-2.0.17.ebuild > 2012-11-26 09:20:15.0 +0100 > +++ ./acpid-2.0.17.ebuild 2013-01-01 14:30:18.0 +0100 > @@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ > RDEPEND="selinux? ( sec-policy/selinux

Re: [gentoo-dev] About using a CONFIGURATION (or SETUP) file under /usr/share/doc for configuration information

2013-01-01 Thread Pacho Ramos
El lun, 31-12-2012 a las 14:53 -0800, Zac Medico escribió: > On 12/31/2012 05:21 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > pkg_postinst() { > > > > Some improvements I am not sure how to implement just now: > > - What would be the proper way to "elog" contents > > of /usr/share/doc/${PF}/CONFIGURATION.bz2 and,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Rich Freeman
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> The certificates that Gentoo distributes have at least been vouched >> for by somebody who is a part of our community, which is more than can >> be said for most of the upstream certifi

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo and Root CAs

2013-01-01 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > The certificates that Gentoo distributes have at least been vouched > for by somebody who is a part of our community, which is more than can > be said for most of the upstream certificates. And you think "vouched for" by some community member

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.17: nscd is optional

2013-01-01 Thread Alec Warner
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 2:24 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote: >> You realize that files are cached in RAM right? > > Yes, I know how operating systems work. > >> More than likely those pages are always in cache. > > Did you read my reply at all? Yo

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.17: nscd is optional

2013-01-01 Thread Maxim Kammerer
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Doug Goldstein wrote: > You realize that files are cached in RAM right? Yes, I know how operating systems work. > More than likely those pages are always in cache. Did you read my reply at all? You are assuming ideal conditions (enough free RAM), for a specific

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.17: nscd is optional

2013-01-01 Thread Doug Goldstein
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Maxim Kammerer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Alec Warner wrote: >> flatfile lookups are 2-4ms with hot cache. How much faster is the db >> option? > > I guess it depends on the implementation and how close is the system's > operational situation to an