I think someone in the documentation herd (Xavier Neys?) has a system for this
in place for regular documents, but it's probably not used for metadata files
yet.
-Original Message-
From: Petteri Räty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 3:59 PM
To: gentoo-dev@list
I think Brian is right, we should stick to being constructive.
Let's start an enterprise project on Gentoo.org
Goals:
1) provide documentation on existing tools and practices for
business/enterprise users.
2) try to enhance the set of tools to build a comprehensive
framewor
>On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 09:04 -0400, Eric Brown wrote:
>>
>> Interesting thread. I have used Gentoo in enterprise situations very
>> successfully, and I think the whole QA/live-tree argument is moot. In
>> an enterprise environment, you might have a backup/tes
Interesting thread. I have used Gentoo in enterprise situations very
successfully, and I think the whole QA/live-tree argument is moot. In
an enterprise environment, you might have a backup/testing machine to
run your updates on first before they went live. You also wouldn't run
new packages u
Not everyone can patch them, more people would be capable of writing
half-baked hacks that resolve most of the issues.
Anyway I guess the new baselayout sounds promising here.
> My point is that Snort and Apache are not alone in this, so I suppose
> quite a few upstream developers just disagree w
A few responses:
(Please forgive the lack of normal formatting)
1) To Chris Gianelloni
I really do agree that it's silly for a daemon to lie about it's
initialization status. However, after actually haven taken some of
these issues upstream (in particular Apache 1.3). I realized that the
upstre
Services that use Gentoo init scripts often report a status of [started] or[OK] even though they fail to start. The most recent bug like this that I'vefound is with snort. If you have a bad rule, snort will initialize, therc-scripts will give it an [OK] status, and then it will die once it
