On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 08:48:37 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:15:53AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 07:55:00 +0100 Harald van Dijk
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | When does upstream get to install arbitrary content on my
| > |
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 08:00:18AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 08:48:37 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:15:53AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 07:55:00 +0100 Harald van Dijk
> | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:11:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > Why else would a user want to refuse ebuilds that set userpriv?
|
| As a safeguard against accidental mistakes by upstream.
But ebuilds setting RESTRICT=userpriv are explicitly saying "we can't
use userpriv not becau
Quoting Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 16:02:01 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
... nothing to add here, sounds alright ...
| Still, your point makes sense. But I hope that you will agree that
| as long as FEATURES=userpriv exists it should be enfor
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 17:39:44 +0900 Georgi Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| And there are probably just as many situations when the RESTRICT is
| abused. I can vaguely recall only one such example: either vpopmail
| or courier-imap refuse to compile *not* as root which is silly.
If that's re
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 08:30:49AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:11:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | > Why else would a user want to refuse ebuilds that set userpriv?
> |
> | As a safeguard against accidental mistakes by upstream.
>
> But ebuilds s
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:53:02 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 08:30:49AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:11:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > But ebuilds setting RESTRICT=userpriv are explicitly saying "we
|
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 10:11:59AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:53:02 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | ACCEPT_RESTRICT=-userpriv (or whatever) would mean "I want to be
> | protected against accidental mistakes, even if it means I can't
> | install some
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:41:27 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 10:11:59AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 10:53:02 +0100 Harald van Dijk
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | ACCEPT_RESTRICT=-userpriv (or whatever) would mean "I want to be
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:55:44AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:41:27 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | I don't think anyone was planning on encouraging people to mess with
> | ACCEPT_RESTRICT if it gets implemented.
>
> Implementing it *is* encouragin
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:04:21 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:55:44AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:41:27 +0100 Harald van Dijk
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | I don't think anyone was planning on encouraging people to mess
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 12:19:18PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:04:21 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:55:44AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 12:41:27 +0100 Harald van Dijk
> | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:30:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > FEATURES has legitimate values. The feature as a whole is useful,
| > even if some of the options have very restricted target audiences.
|
| So if ACCEPT_* were implemented in a way that lets you write
| ACCEPT="keywo
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 12:46:58PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:30:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | > FEATURES has legitimate values. The feature as a whole is useful,
> | > even if some of the options have very restricted target audiences.
> |
> |
On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 16:36 -0600, Jason Huebel wrote:
> K, so my account hasn't been retired yet, so I'm making this comment as a
> developer (at least until someone gets around to my retirement bug). :-)
>
> I really like blubb's idea here. Not just of implementing GLEP 42, but the
> idea of hav
Well, we've replaced this with catalyst, there's been no movement on it
for 4 years now, "upstream" has abandoned it, and Release Engineering
wants no part in it. It's been maintainer-needed for who knows how
long.
If someone doesn't step up in 30 days, it's getting the axe.
--
Chris Gianelloni
There's a ChangeLog file in profiles/ChangeLog now. Please use it when
making changes to things in profiles/*...
Thanks,
--
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation
signature.asc
Hi,
the USE flag tcltk should not be used anymore and migrated to tcl
and/or tk flags. The corresponding bug [1] is very old, but there are
still some packages missing (see comment #53 there).
Remember that the latest stable (if any) and testing should have the
split USE flags, so that built_wit
Ciaran pointed out that there are "a small number of occasions where it
[the userpriv FEATURE] really does need to be disabled". I consequently
decided to see what these legitimate reasons are but it appears that
RESTRICT=userpriv is not needed in a lot of cases.
Here is a list of all packages tha
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 12:53:35AM +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> RESTRICT=userpriv or RESTRICT=nouserpriv (no idea why there are both).
no.* is the old form for restricts; the 'no' chunk of it when seen,
should be removed.
~harring
pgpieaR6Z50In.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 14:05:49 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 12:46:58PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:30:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > | > FEATURES has legitimate values. The feature as a whole is
| >
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 05:19:02PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 14:05:49 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 12:46:58PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:30:11 +0100 Harald van Dijk
> | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Sunday 07 January 2007 11:27, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> 1. Add default.
we've gone this route ... if/when an issue comes up where someone is
inheriting autotools but they're using it conditionally, we'll revisit this
autotools.eclass:
[[ -z ${WANT_AUTOCONF} ]] && WANT_AUTOCONF="latest"
[[ -z ${WA
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> There's a ChangeLog file in profiles/ChangeLog now. Please use it when
> making changes to things in profiles/*...
Should we prefer this location for trees that already have a ChangeLog
in them as well? It's kind of random which places have a ChangeLog and
which don't.
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 10:00 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > There's a ChangeLog file in profiles/ChangeLog now. Please use it when
> > making changes to things in profiles/*...
>
> Should we prefer this location for trees that already have a ChangeLog
> in them as well
On 1/12/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sunday 07 January 2007 11:27, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> 1. Add default.
we've gone this route ... if/when an issue comes up where someone is
inheriting autotools but they're using it conditionally, we'll revisit this
autotools.eclass:
[[ -z $
On Friday 12 January 2007 13:14, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> if/when an issue comes up where someone is
> inheriting autotools but they're using it conditionally, we'll revisit this
seems Diego is two steps ahead ... set the vars to "none" :)
-mike
pgpt5VjQENLt7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Friday 12 January 2007 13:37, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> After you commit this
Diego already did
-mike
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:53 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> # no idea about the following three, input appreciated
> app-admin/gps
> media-gfx/maya
This one doesn't need RESTRICT=userpriv (at least my 8.0 ebuild in my
overlay doesn't) from my testing.
> # These are games... no idea why, input app
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:42:20 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| > And noauto and noclean do have specific genuine use, so it's not a
| > fair comparison.
|
| Again irrelevant to the point, since regardless of whether they have
| some small valid use, they should not be recommended t
Normally, I wouldn't send private responses to the list, but since this
is something everyone can use (and nothing "private") I am making an
exception.
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 09:22 -0700, Steve Dibb wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Would that Changelog in profiles/ need to be updated for stuff
> recursively a
On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:53 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> # These are games... no idea why, input appreciated
> games-board/ggz-txt-client
> games-board/ggz-sdl-games
> games-board/ggz-gtk-games
> games-board/ggz-kde-games
> games-board/gnuchess-book
> games-board/ggz-kde-client
> games-board/ggz
Tristan Heaven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:53 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> > # These are games... no idea why, input appreciated
> > games-board/ggz-txt-client
> > games-board/ggz-sdl-games
> > games-board/ggz-gtk-games
> > games-board/ggz-kde-games
> > games-board/gnuc
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 13:05 -0800, Drake Wyrm wrote:
> Tristan Heaven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:53 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> > > # These are games... no idea why, input appreciated
> > > games-board/ggz-txt-client
> > > games-board/ggz-sdl-games
> > > games-board
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:36:06 +
Tristan Heaven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:53 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> They have to be able to read /usr/games/lib.
In which case adding the portage user to the games group seems overall
to be a better solution than requiring roo
# Raúl Porcel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (12 Jan 2007)
# Upstream dead almost 3 years ago and doesn't compile with GCC 4.x.
# Pending removal 12 Feb 2007, bug 153268
net-p2p/teknap
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 10:46:36PM +, Stephen Bennett wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 00:53 +0900, Georgi Georgiev wrote:
> > They have to be able to read /usr/games/lib.
> In which case adding the portage user to the games group seems overall
> to be a better solution than requiring root priv
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:12:00PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:42:20 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | With ACCEPT_RESTRICT=-fetch, you tell it you don't want packages with
> | RESTRICT=fetch, so portage /should/ complain regardless of whether the
> | sources a
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Imagine you have userpriv in FEATURES. If an ebuild has
> RESTRICT=userpriv, it *WILL* disable userpriv, no matter what the user
> does. Adding ACCEPT_RESTRICT allows the user to not list userpriv (or
> -userpriv if userpriv is on by default) and the ebuild WILL NOT RUN
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:08:15 -0800
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Putting the portage user into the special group would mean that
> somebody could steal the MySQL password - so do you
> RESTRICT=userpriv, or fail the build?
If someone can subvert Portage's build process they can
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Submit your ideas here, so we can discuss them. I will be choosing one
> idea that we think we can accomplish to test out the idea of
> Council-driven projects.
How far was Curtis from finishing www-redesign?
--
by design, by ne
maillog: 12/01/2007-15:08:15(-0800): Robin H. Johnson types
>
> The vpopmail stuff has/has a similar issue (upstream is working on
> solving it via a different avenue at which point the problem will go
> away).
But I tried "emerge vpopmail" on a clean system... the /var/vpopmail/lib and
include
maillog: 13/01/2007-02:05:45(+0100): Harald van Dijk types
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:12:00PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:42:20 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > | With ACCEPT_RESTRICT=-fetch, you tell it you don't want packages with
> > | RESTRICT=fetch, so
Ryan Hill wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>
>> Submit your ideas here, so we can discuss them. I will be choosing one
>> idea that we think we can accomplish to test out the idea of
>> Council-driven projects.
>
> How far was Curtis from finishing www-redesign?
>
The whole thing was pretty muc
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 02:05:45 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:12:00PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:42:20 +0100 Harald van Dijk
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| > | With ACCEPT_RESTRICT=-fetch, you tell it you don't want packages
| > |
On Sat, Jan 13, 2007 at 05:45:31AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 02:05:45 +0100 Harald van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> | On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 07:12:00PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:42:20 +0100 Harald van Dijk
> | > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
46 matches
Mail list logo
