On 2/7/2018 9:54 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
> # Matt Turner (06 Feb 2018)
> # Dead and unused
> # Masked for removal in 30 days. Bug #646838
> x11-libs/libXCalibrate
> x11-libs/libXfontcache
> x11-misc/xtscal
> x11-proto/fontcacheproto
> x11-proto/xcalibrateproto
> x11-proto/xf86rushproto
> From e59
From e590965cdeb0c921194740da0481c85afaa1ebae Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt Turner
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 14:02:59 -0800
Subject: x11-base/xorg-server: Remove dead x11-proto/xf86rushproto dependency
rushproto hasn't been required since upstream commit 8ec79e05feac (in
2005!), and even th
On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 14:57 +0100, Michael Lienhardt wrote:
> > > From e590965cdeb0c921194740da0481c85afaa1ebae Mon Sep 17
> > > 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: Matt Turner
> > > Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 14:02:59 -0800
> > > Subject: x11-base/xorg-server: Remove dead x11-
> > > proto/xf86rushproto depende
On Thu, 08 Feb 2018 16:51:52 +0200
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-02-08 at 14:57 +0100, Michael Lienhardt wrote:
> > > > From e590965cdeb0c921194740da0481c85afaa1ebae Mon Sep 17
> > > > 00:00:00 2001
> > > > From: Matt Turner
> > > > Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 14:02:59 -0800
> > > > Subject: x1
Il 08/02/2018 16:04, James Le Cuirot ha scritto:
Citing Kenneth Hoste at FOSDEM this year: modifying a package
without changing its version is a bad idea.
His presentation was very good (video included):
https://fosdem.org/2
018/schedule/event/how_to_make_package_managers_cry/
This isn't so c
Remove the limitation that all files covered by the Manifest must reside
on a single filesystem. This breaks valid uses of overlayfs without
providing any real advantage.
The removal is justified further in the updated rationale section.
---
glep-0074.rst | 66 +++-
On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:05:55 +0100
Michael Lienhardt wrote:
> Il 08/02/2018 16:04, James Le Cuirot ha scritto:
> >>> Citing Kenneth Hoste at FOSDEM this year: modifying a package
> >>> without changing its version is a bad idea.
> >>> His presentation was very good (video included):
> >>> https://
On 08/02/18 17:09, Michał Górny wrote:
> Remove the limitation that all files covered by the Manifest must reside
> on a single filesystem. This breaks valid uses of overlayfs without
> providing any real advantage.
>
> The removal is justified further in the updated rationale section.
> ---
> gle
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 5:37 AM, Brian Evans wrote:
> On 2/7/2018 9:54 PM, Matt Turner wrote:
>> # Matt Turner (06 Feb 2018)
>> # Dead and unused
>> # Masked for removal in 30 days. Bug #646838
>> x11-libs/libXCalibrate
>> x11-libs/libXfontcache
>> x11-misc/xtscal
>> x11-proto/fontcacheproto
>> x1
W dniu czw, 08.02.2018 o godzinie 17∶25 +, użytkownik M. J. Everitt
napisał:
> On 08/02/18 17:09, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Remove the limitation that all files covered by the Manifest must reside
> > on a single filesystem. This breaks valid uses of overlayfs without
> > providing any real advan
On 2/8/2018 12:14 PM, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:05:55 +0100
> Michael Lienhardt wrote:
>> Thanks for the information and sorry for the noise.
>> I wasn't fully aware of the meaning of the --dynamics-deps and
>> --changed-deps option. I am still not entirely convinced that
>> c
Hi all,
I have noticed that in the latest versions of udev we are patching the
default upstream rules to accomodate our "uucp" group.
I don't think it is a good idea to patch default rules, so, I want to
bring up possible fixes.
First, baselayout has had the "dialout" group since 2015, so the
All,
here is a proposed newsitem for baselayout 2.5.
Let me know what you think, including whether these are newsitem-worthy
or not.
Thanks,
William
Title: baselayout 2.5 updates
Author: William Hubbs
Posted: 2018-02-xx
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 2.0
Display-If-Installed:
signature.asc
D
On 02/06/2018 11:52 AM, Michael Lienhardt wrote:
>
> To help, you can send us the tar generated by this bash script:
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/HyVar/gentoo_to_mspl/master/benchmarks/get_installation.sh
>
> This bash script extracts your world file, the USE flags and keywords
> configurati
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:52 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> here is a proposed newsitem for baselayout 2.5.
>
> Let me know what you think, including whether these are newsitem-worthy
> or not.
Eliminating ROOTPATH seems like a significant change. Was this
officially discussed somewhere that
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:03 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have noticed that in the latest versions of udev we are patching the
> default upstream rules to accomodate our "uucp" group.
>
> I don't think it is a good idea to patch default rules, so, I want to
> bring up possible fixes.
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, William Hubbs wrote:
> First, baselayout has had the "dialout" group since 2015, so the
> longterm fix imo is to possibly use that instead of the uucp group.
> What would it take to make that happen, or are we stuck with the
> uucp group forever?
There was an old discuss
On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 13:02:28 -0500
Brian Evans wrote:
> On 2/8/2018 12:14 PM, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 18:05:55 +0100
> > Michael Lienhardt wrote:
> >> Thanks for the information and sorry for the noise.
> >> I wasn't fully aware of the meaning of the --dynamics-deps and
>
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> Eliminating ROOTPATH seems like a significant change. Was this
> officially discussed somewhere that I missed?
> I actually support the change, but other people should be given the
> chance to complain about it on the record.
It contradicts the FHS
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Eliminating ROOTPATH seems like a significant change. Was this
>> officially discussed somewhere that I missed?
>
>> I actually support the change, but other people should be given the
>> chan
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >
> >> Eliminating ROOTPATH seems like a significant change. Was this
> >> officially discussed somewhere that I missed?
> >
> >>
On 08/02/18 22:13, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> However, there are plenty of examples of commands that normal users
>> may run from sbin. Moving these commands often causes problems for
>> packages that either hard code absolute paths, or
On 02/08/2018 05:13 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> There are no reasons to remove the *sbin directories from PATH; I know
> of no other distros that do this.
The first reason that comes to mind is that when I type something like
p to remind me of a command name, I don't need to see 50 programs
that
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 5:17 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>
>
> On 08/02/18 22:13, William Hubbs wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:55:02PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>> However, there are plenty of examples of commands that normal users
>>> may run from sbin. Moving these commands often causes prob
All,
here is a link to an old, but brief discussion about this.
https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/2fc1f62c7cf225787fe52f4dace7368c
I think we have talked about this several other times, but not done
anything about it.
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 10:17:59PM +, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>
On 08/02/18 22:33, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> here is a link to an old, but brief discussion about this.
>
> https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/message/2fc1f62c7cf225787fe52f4dace7368c
>
> I think we have talked about this several other times, but not done
> anything about it.
>
> On Thu,
On 02/08/2018 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> There are actually quite a few binaries in /sbin and /usr/sbin which
> can be useful for non-root users. Sure, we could go through there
> carefully and move stuff to /bin but honestly doing what everybody
> else does and just sticking /sbin in the
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 2:32 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> First, baselayout has had the "dialout" group since 2015, so the
>> longterm fix imo is to possibly use that instead of the uucp group.
>> What would it take to make that happen, or are we st
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 05:49:52PM -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 02/08/2018 05:33 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> >
> > There are actually quite a few binaries in /sbin and /usr/sbin which
> > can be useful for non-root users. Sure, we could go through there
> > carefully and move stuff to /bin b
On 02/08/2018 06:12 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> There is no bug here. The problem, as I said before in this thread, is
> that what goes in *sbin is arbitrary, and as Rich said, if you are
> relying on the path to prevent a non-root user from running something
> that only root should run, you are
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 02/08/2018 06:12 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>
>> There is no bug here. The problem, as I said before in this thread, is
>> that what goes in *sbin is arbitrary, and as Rich said, if you are
>> relying on the path to prevent a non-root use
> On Thu, 8 Feb 2018, R0b0t1 wrote:
> It makes the most sense to me to give a uucp user dialout or tty
> permission, instead of adding myself to the uucp group, a name which
> references programs most people won't have installed and won't know
> about.
The tty group has an entirely different
32 matches
Mail list logo
