Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-19 Thread Stefan de Konink
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Mike Frysinger schreef: > i can add an elog, but the arguments for not turning it on by default are far > from convincing Please, only do this, and I'll stop about this subject. :) So something like *beep*beep*beep* /tmp will now by default cleane

Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-19 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Saturday 19 January 2008, Stefan de Konink wrote: > Mike Frysinger schreef: > > On Saturday 19 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote: > >> On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: > >>> In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state > >>> as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. > >> > >> That's

Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-19 Thread Stefan de Konink
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Mike Frysinger schreef: > On Saturday 19 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote: >> On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: >>> In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state >>> as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. >> That's a fair point. > > ho

Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-19 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Saturday 19 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote: > On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: > > In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state > > as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. > > That's a fair point. how ? these two options are not related in the slightest. -mike signature.asc

Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-19 Thread Richard Freeman
Mark Loeser wrote: Should an elog statement been put into the ebuild...maybe. I leave that up to the maintainer to decide what is important enough to be logged, and they clearly thought this wasn't in this case. I think that this would probably warrant an elog. Sure, anybody who knows the "

Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-19 Thread Roy Marples
On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 02:48 +0100, Stefan de Konink wrote: > In my opinion WIPE_TMP should be in the same state > as RC_PARALLEL_STARTUP. That's a fair point. Luckily, the all the Gentoo init scripts that all my computers use are now at the stage where we could easily flick parallel startup on by

Re: [gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-18 Thread Mark Loeser
Stefan de Konink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > How stupid anyone could be that stores anything in /tmp. I think it is a > problem to change the default behavior of a system that in essence will > result in data loss. I think this might just be a communication problem. You seem to be contradicting y

[gentoo-dev] Concerns about WIPE_TMP change

2008-01-18 Thread Stefan de Konink
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hello, I joined this mailinglist because of my concern pointed in: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206604 How stupid anyone could be that stores anything in /tmp. I think it is a problem to change the default behavior of a system that in