Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Alan McKinnon
On 05/12/2013 01:45, Patrick Lauer wrote: > On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in random

Re: [gentoo-dev] logging in openntpd 20080406-r3+

2013-12-04 Thread Paul B. Henson
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 03:44:42PM -0800, Paul B. Henson wrote: > I've tested a variety of scenarios, from the network interface being > down/unplugged, providing invalid NTP servers, etc., and I haven't > seen a delay longer than 15 seconds. I tracked down the failure mode where openntpd will tak

[gentoo-dev] python versioned libraries or not

2013-12-04 Thread heroxbd
Dear all, I have only one python-2.7 on my system. Simple and stupid. After boost ebuild is converted to python-r1, libboost_python.so is renamed to libboost_python-2.7.so. This is all cool about python-r1 for multiple python implementation support. At the same time, I don't need this feature. I

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 07:17:45PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > > On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > >>> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Patrick Lauer
On 12/05/2013 08:13 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 07:45:22AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote: >> On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: > seems li

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 07:45:22AM +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote: > On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: > >>> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful ex

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Patrick Lauer
On 12/05/2013 05:30 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: >>> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in >>> random package(s) a la binary-distribution style >> >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 05:36:37PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > Thinking on this further, the same logic could be applied to > sys-apps/openrc, and probably a few other packages that are not > build/toolchain critical. I suppose we need to draw a sanity line > somewhere. ^_^ I think what you are t

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 5:31 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 04:30:30PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: >> >> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything u

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 04:30:30PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: > >> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in > >> random package(s) a la binary-dis

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Mike Gilbert
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 4:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: >> seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in >> random package(s) a la binary-distribution style > > What about the stages? Don't we need some form of

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 06:46:36PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote: > seems like a virtual that wouldn't do anything useful except pull in > random package(s) a la binary-distribution style What about the stages? Don't we need some form of net support in stage 3? William signature.asc Description

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread Samuli Suominen
On 03/12/13 23:11, William Hubbs wrote: > On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 09:32:10PM +0400, Alexander V Vershilov wrote: >> On Dec 3, 2013 1:24 AM, "Ian Stakenvicius" wrote: >>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >>> Hash: SHA256 >>> >>> On 02/12/13 04:19 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: On 12/02

Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

2013-12-04 Thread William Hubbs
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 07:14:37PM -0600, mingdao wrote: > > Just curious why you don't also include net-misc/connman? > > wicd doesn't support nl80211 and isn't being developed upstream anymore, so > it's just a matter of time before it's demise. I didn't include connman only because I didn't k