Dave Nebinger posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted
below, on Mon, 03 Oct 2005 01:46:13 -0400:
>> Wouldn't it be better to use the
>> associated portage-provided packages?
>
> That's the goal - strip out the parts from their distribution that have
> exiting components already within the porta
On 03/10/05, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd prefer if the patch was left out for amd64 users, or included via a
> use flag. reiser4 isn't yet stable or proven on amd64.
A quick search found this quote: "The topic in channel #gentoo-amd64
on irc.freenode.net has said "Reiser4 is evil"
Tres Melton posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted
below, on Mon, 03 Oct 2005 00:49:29 -0600:
> However, this is going to take a couple of weeks to write entirely in
> bash so that it is both portable and can be used on the most minimal of
> systems.
Imagine seeing /you/ here! =8^)
Portability
Brian Harring wrote:
>On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 11:07:13PM +0200, Francesco R wrote:
>
>
>>The ready to cut ebuild at the bottom print it's environment (variable
>>and functions) to a bunch of files into /var/tmp/fakebuild/.
>>May be useful for who want to have a look at "what" and "when" is
>>ava
On Monday 03 October 2005 11:14, Duncan wrote:
> Portability is good, but as I've been reading Diego "Flameeyes" various
> posts as he struggles to get Gentoo/FBSD up and running, and with
> Gentoo/Darwin and etc. in mind, I'm sure one of the requests is going to
> be making it full borne shell sta
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 12:04 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Monday 03 October 2005 11:14, Duncan wrote:
Hello Duncan.
> Actually, bash is fine, as long as you declare #!/bin/bash the script. Every
> Gentoo/ALT system should have bash installed as part of base system, as bash
> is w
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 10:10 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> On 03/10/05, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd prefer if the patch was left out for amd64 users, or included via a
> > use flag. reiser4 isn't yet stable or proven on amd64.
>
> A quick search found this quote: "The topic in
On Monday 03 October 2005 13:39, Tres Melton wrote:
> I've coded the parts that
> extract and parse the information from the /etc/{passwd,group} files
I think with this you're already out of portability. /etc/passwd structure in
Linux and FreeBSD is different, and on Darwin the users part is comp
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 10:02 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> On 02/10/05, R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The grub maintainer's stance was that reiser 4 support would not be
> > included in grub until it was included in gentoo-sources, not any kernel
> > in portage. The grub maintainer has b
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 13:21 -0400, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> Hi, I would just like some clarification if at all possible.
>
> Recently, while testing bugzilla-2.18.4 for x86 (bug # 107796) I ran
> into some interactivity. I was under the impression that emerge was
> supposed to be completely autonomou
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 17:43 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> On 02/10/05, Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/2/05, Chris Bainbridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 02/10/05, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> > > > > On 02/10/05, R Hill <[EMAI
Hi,
I just wanted to remind you guys that this is about the last chance you
have to send me your GPG keys to be added to the list. For instructions
please see http://dev.gentoo.org/~cryos/keysigning_lwe_05.html and email
me your key.
Look forward to seeing you guys down at the expo in London
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 22:57 -0500, Mike Doty wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> | On Thursday 29 September 2005 02:10 pm, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> |
> |>I was wondering if there's any chance of having the reiser4 patch for
> |>grub (or even the wh
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 10:10 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> On 03/10/05, Mike Doty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'd prefer if the patch was left out for amd64 users, or included via a
> > use flag. reiser4 isn't yet stable or proven on amd64.
>
> A quick search found this quote: "The topic in
Chris Gianelloni posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
excerpted below, on Mon, 03 Oct 2005 08:54:21 -0400:
> On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 10:02 +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
>> On 02/10/05, R Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I still think it's retarded to have a reiser 4 boot partition, but
>> > whatever st
maillog: 03/10/2005-08:56:57(-0400): Chris Gianelloni types
> On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 13:21 -0400, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > Hi, I would just like some clarification if at all possible.
> >
> > Recently, while testing bugzilla-2.18.4 for x86 (bug # 107796) I ran
> > into some interactivity. I was unde
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:15:37 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Does it seem like it is time for RESTRICT=interactive. Such ebuilds
| would refuse to emerge if stdout is not a tty. If only there was
| use-flag based RESTRICT...
No, because then that would encourage even more people
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tuesday 04 October 2005 19:06, Benjamin Allen wrote:
what?
--
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
pgpYQqCyrGVAe.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:15:37 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Does it seem like it is time for RESTRICT=interactive. Such ebuilds
> | would refuse to emerge if stdout is not a tty. If only there was
> | use-flag based RESTRICT...
>
> No, because then tha
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 19:39 +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:15:37 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | Does it seem like it is time for RESTRICT=interactive. Such ebuilds
> > | would refuse to emerge if stdout is not a tty. If only ther
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 07:39:05PM +0200, Jan Kundr?t wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:15:37 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > | Does it seem like it is time for RESTRICT=interactive. Such ebuilds
> > | would refuse to emerge if stdout is not a tty. If on
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 17:51 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 23:15:37 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Does it seem like it is time for RESTRICT=interactive. Such ebuilds
> | would refuse to emerge if stdout is not a tty. If only there was
> | use-flag based RE
On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 13:23 -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> C) 15 hour upgrade/build, hanging an hour into it is going to be an
> ass biter.
This is actually why I've been doing something I would normally *not* do
and have been breaking up some games ebuilds that require a CD into a
$foo and $foo-d
Brian Harring wrote:
> Ebuilds are non-interactive compile/install... that's the design, and
> intention of them.
Sure, I thought that RESTRICT=interactive would just tell the user that
she would have to provide some feedback in cases like those that
wolf31o2 mentioned ("games from CD").
> I don
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 03:05 -0500, Brian Harring wrote:
> Hola.
>
> Subject says it all; SANDBOX_DISABLED functions as (essentially)
> RESTRICT="sandbox", except sandbox is left on for pkg_setup .
>
> This is pretty much redundant, considering it's usage. People stick
> it in the global scope;
26 matches
Mail list logo
