On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 06:03:53 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn posted on Wed, 25 Jul 2012 21:58:30
> +0200 as excerpted:
>
> > Kent Fredric schrieb:
> >> On 23 July 2012 08:48, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
> >> wrote:
> >>> I do see some advantage of the
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Luca Barbato wrote:
> I'd add it, it is a gpl incompatible opensource license.
No problem to add it. But IMHO the usage restriction in section 3
makes it non-free:
"You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only
for purposes that are authorized b
On 26 July 2012 19:32, Michał Górny wrote:
> But you are aware that this is *upstream* naming?
>
> Similarly, ati-drivers (which is not upstream naming :P)
> and nvidia-drivers don't follow the suite.
I wasn't aware of that, but thats beside the point I was trying to
make. Its just a mechanism th
# Tiziano Müller (24 Jul 2012)
# Now part of net-fs/cifs-utils & unmaintained by upstream
# Security bug #308067 and bugs #427702, #232608, #247809,
# #258409, #265183, #337691, #342783, #279074
# Removal in 30 days
net-fs/mount-cifs
Kent Fredric schrieb:
> firmware-video/ati-firmware
> firmware-video/ati
>
> and any category name with "Firmware" in it, will result in lots of
> redundant names exposed to users/deps if the package /also/ has
> firmware in the name.
Indeed, but this redundancy already exists in tree, e.g. dev-l
> > On Thu, 26 Jul 2012, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > I'd add it, it is a gpl incompatible opensource license.
>
> No problem to add it. But IMHO the usage restriction in section 3
> makes it non-free:
>
> "You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only
> for purposes that a
# Samuli Suominen (26 Jul 2012)
# We are in process of dropping most of GTK+-2.x Ubuntu
# Ayatana libraries from tree and unfortunately glipper
# has hardcoded dependency on libappindicator's Python
# GTK+-2.x bindings
# Removal in 30 days
x11-misc/glipper
I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibility build? That is, the
build would be run in a
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a
On 07/26/12 14:26, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibi
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Michael Mol wrote:
> (Really, this observation is more about simply making the information
> available; distcc could consume that information if someone chose to
> do the work to add that functionality.)
Well, I'm not sure how to get the info out of the internals
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:27:41 -0400
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think a consolidated systemd/udev package is the best
>> way to go here.
>
> A consolidated package means that:
>
> - every change made by udev developers would have
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
> been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
>
> But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
> a FEATURE for portage to do a
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Peter Alfredsen
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:27:41 -0400
>> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>> Personally, I think a consolidated systemd/udev package is the best
>>> way to go here.
>>
>> A consolidated package
On 07/26/2012 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> Implementing it wouldn't necessarily be hard - just create a tmpfs
> under /var/tmp/portage, unshare off a new mount namespace, and
> read-only bind-mount everything needed from the root filesystem
> (including /var/tmp/portage/...), and chroot into it.
On 7/26/2012 11:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
I've been messing around with namespaces and some of what systemd has
been doing with them, and I have an idea for a portage feature.
But before doing a brain dump of ideas, how useful would it be to have
a FEATURE for portage to do a limited-visibility
Canek Peláez Valdés posted on Thu, 26 Jul 2012 17:08:35 -0500 as
excerpted:
> Just to clarify, udev/systemd never promised "to make the component
> parts buildable separately". They promised:
>
> "we will be supporting this for a long time since it is a necessity to
> make initrds (which lack sys
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
[ snip ]
> 9) Otherwise, at very minimum, they're failing the "build udev pretty
> much the same as before"
./configure
make
make install
You fail to see the matter from their POV. They don't care (that much)
about building, be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/23/2012 01:44 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il 23/07/2012 10:30, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina ha scritto:
>> Those are two very valid reasons why we can't add these to the profiles,
>> but do you have any suggestions on how we can get more tha
On 20 July 2012 06:28, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Jul 2012, Sascha Cunz wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason for not using at least en_US.UTF-8 as a "sane"
>> default value?
>
> Because there's no one-size-fits-all locale, but it is specific to
> every system so the user must configure it?
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:44:47 -0400
"Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
> I would REALLY like to cut down on things like what I saw when I
> upgraded today:
>
> * Messages for package
> app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20120520:
You are looking for QA_FLAGS_IGNORED.
--
Best regards,
Mich
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/27/2012 02:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 01:44:47 -0400
> "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" wrote:
>
>> I would REALLY like to cut down on things like what I saw when I
>> upgraded today:
>>
>> * Messages for package
>> app-emula
22 matches
Mail list logo
