headers
Tomáš Chvátal | 1 Feb 2011 01:10
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: Adding app-arch/xz-utils to the system set


Dne 1.2.2011 00:33, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto napsal(a):
> Hello.
> 
> Given the increased use of lzma compressed files, including on portage
> snapshots, I'd like to add app-arch/xz-utils to the system set.
> We already have a few bugs about requiring xz-utils such as
> 347557[1] and 305127[2].
> 
>  [1] - https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=347557
>  [2] - https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=305127
> 
> Can anyone think of any reason "not" to do it?
> 
On that note i sent zac proof of concept patch that made repoman whine
when ebuild was using some compression yet was not depending on the
proper pkg.

I wonder where i put that thing so i could finish it up :)
(yes i know most ebuilds does not do so but they should :P)

Tom
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Jeroen Roovers | 1 Feb 2011 08:41
Picon
Favicon

Re: [warning] the bug queue has 81 bugs

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 14:00:04 +0200 (EET)
Alex Alexander <wired <at> gentoo.org> wrote:

> Our bug queue has 81 bugs!

A pattern is starting to emerge, where by Sunday there are usually more
than fifty and sometimes up to a hundred unassigned bug reports waiting,
sometimes double that. It looks like a few people are doing basic
reviewing on a couple dozen bugs during the days that I work, but from
Saturday until Sunday, most bugs are filed and many get left to go
stale for days, contrary to the purpose of the bug-wranglers project,
which states that we should strive to assign bugs within a day (say 24
hours) after reviewing them and improving them. Since I work basically
from Wednesday until Sunday, most bug reports now get assigned somewhere
between Sunday and Wednesday. I'd have liked to give some better
statistics (and didn't we have some script for the LWN that did that?
Is it still running?) but I don't currently have them. Maybe Alex's
script could warn about the number of stale bugs (maybe having Status:
NEW; age > 24 hours) but I guess that would intrude too much on this
mailing list. It would certainly help to have some performance
statistics available on a regular basis.

     jer
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Andreas K. Huettel | 1 Feb 2011 10:02
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: [warning] the bug queue has 81 bugs

I take a data point on the number of open bugs for a few queries twice per 
day, see 

http://www.akhuettel.de/gentoo-bugs/

Bugwrangler bugs is one of the plots further down in the list. On this scale 
no obvious pattern is visible, but I'll make later on a plot for a shorter 
time period....

Cheers, A

PS. Yes Infra knows and I promised not to extend this to more and more 
queries... :)

On Tuesday 01 February 2011 08:41:07 Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 14:00:04 +0200 (EET)
> 
> Alex Alexander <wired <at> gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Our bug queue has 81 bugs!
> 
> A pattern is starting to emerge, where by Sunday there are usually more
> than fifty and sometimes up to a hundred unassigned bug reports waiting,
> sometimes double that. It looks like a few people are doing basic
> reviewing on a couple dozen bugs during the days that I work, but from
> Saturday until Sunday, most bugs are filed and many get left to go
> stale for days, contrary to the purpose of the bug-wranglers project,
> which states that we should strive to assign bugs within a day (say 24
> hours) after reviewing them and improving them. Since I work basically
> from Wednesday until Sunday, most bug reports now get assigned somewhere
> between Sunday and Wednesday. I'd have liked to give some better
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Zeerak Mustafa Waseem | 1 Feb 2011 10:35
Picon

User defined license groups

Hey guys,

I ran with ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" for a while and a few days ago I decided to look into the licenses the programs
I'm using need and read up on them, then add them manually.
I then remembered the license groups and proceeded to specify my own license group in
/usr/portage/profiles/license_groups, first emerge -uDN  <at> world worked great, all downgrades from
license masking were dropped. But then I sync'ed my tree, and now my own group is gone.

So I was wondering if there is another place to specify license groups? If not, would I go to the bugzilla and
file a bug for a feature request or is there another way to go about it?

--

-- 
Best Regards

Zeerak Waseem
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Zac Medico | 1 Feb 2011 11:05
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: User defined license groups

On 02/01/2011 01:35 AM, Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote:
> Hey guys,
> 
> I ran with ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" for a while and a few days ago I decided to look into the licenses the programs
I'm using need and read up on them, then add them manually.
> I then remembered the license groups and proceeded to specify my own license group in
/usr/portage/profiles/license_groups, first emerge -uDN  <at> world worked great, all downgrades from
license masking were dropped. But then I sync'ed my tree, and now my own group is gone.
> 
> So I was wondering if there is another place to specify license groups? If not, would I go to the bugzilla and
file a bug for a feature request or is there another way to go about it?

It's possible to add license groups via an overlay, which means that you
can set PORTDIR_OVERLAY="${MY_OVERLAY}" in /etc/make.conf, and then
define your license groups in ${MY_OVERLAY}/profiles/license_groups.

You can go ahead and file a bug at bugs.gentoo.org if you'd like to have
support added for /etc/portage/license_groups.
--

-- 
Thanks,
Zac
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Michał Górny | 1 Feb 2011 11:27
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: User defined license groups

On Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:05:49 -0800
Zac Medico <zmedico <at> gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 02/01/2011 01:35 AM, Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> > 
> > I ran with ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" for a while and a few days ago I
> > decided to look into the licenses the programs I'm using need and
> > read up on them, then add them manually. I then remembered the
> > license groups and proceeded to specify my own license group
> > in /usr/portage/profiles/license_groups, first emerge -uDN  <at> world
> > worked great, all downgrades from license masking were dropped. But
> > then I sync'ed my tree, and now my own group is gone.
> > 
> > So I was wondering if there is another place to specify license
> > groups? If not, would I go to the bugzilla and file a bug for a
> > feature request or is there another way to go about it?
> 
> It's possible to add license groups via an overlay, which means that
> you can set PORTDIR_OVERLAY="${MY_OVERLAY}" in /etc/make.conf, and
> then define your license groups in
> ${MY_OVERLAY}/profiles/license_groups.
> 
> You can go ahead and file a bug at bugs.gentoo.org if you'd like to
> have support added for /etc/portage/license_groups.

How about /etc/portage/profile? Won't that work?

--

-- 
Best regards,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Duncan | 1 Feb 2011 12:13
Picon

Re: User defined license groups

Zeerak Mustafa Waseem posted on Tue, 01 Feb 2011 10:35:33 +0100 as
excerpted:

> I ran with ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" for a while and a few days ago I decided to
> look into the licenses the programs I'm using need and read up on them,
> then add them manually.
> I then remembered the license groups and proceeded to specify my own
> license group in /usr/portage/profiles/license_groups, first emerge -uDN
>  <at> world worked great, all downgrades from license masking were dropped.
> But then I sync'ed my tree, and now my own group is gone.
> 
> So I was wondering if there is another place to specify license groups? 

Just a gentle hint.  This list is for development discussion.  Your 
question would have been more appropriate on the general user list, or 
even on the portage-specific devel list, where at least it wouldn't have 
bothered all these devs, most of which work on packages other than 
portage, and who I'm sure we'd both rather have spending their time fixing 
bugs or doing package bumps than reading what could quickly become an 
overwhelming number of questions here, if such user questions weren't 
steered elsewhere. =:^(

But you've asked it here now, so might as well answer it while I'm 
steering you elsewhere for next time.  =:^)

One possibility, assuming you're using standard rsync for your portage 
tree (not the webrsync or similar options) is to assign something like:

PORTAGE_RSYNC_EXTRA_OPTS="--exclude-from='/etc/portage/rsync.exclude'"
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Donnie Berkholz | 1 Feb 2011 15:12
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: [warning] the bug queue has 81 bugs

On 10:02 Tue 01 Feb     , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> I take a data point on the number of open bugs for a few queries twice per 
> day, see 
> 
> http://www.akhuettel.de/gentoo-bugs/
> 
> Bugwrangler bugs is one of the plots further down in the list. On this scale 
> no obvious pattern is visible, but I'll make later on a plot for a shorter 
> time period....

Those are neat!

Try averaging across your whole time period by day of the week. Although 
that may not be complex enough, you might need to fit it to a baseline 
first to account for the longer-term trends...

By the way, could you please change the dates to be YYYY-MM-DD (a la ISO 
8601) so they make sense to everyone? I was blindingly confused at first 
and thought they spanned a few days rather than a year.

--

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Zac Medico | 1 Feb 2011 17:26
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: User defined license groups

On 02/01/2011 02:27 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Feb 2011 02:05:49 -0800
> Zac Medico <zmedico <at> gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 02/01/2011 01:35 AM, Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote:
>>> Hey guys,
>>>
>>> I ran with ACCEPT_LICENSE="*" for a while and a few days ago I
>>> decided to look into the licenses the programs I'm using need and
>>> read up on them, then add them manually. I then remembered the
>>> license groups and proceeded to specify my own license group
>>> in /usr/portage/profiles/license_groups, first emerge -uDN  <at> world
>>> worked great, all downgrades from license masking were dropped. But
>>> then I sync'ed my tree, and now my own group is gone.
>>>
>>> So I was wondering if there is another place to specify license
>>> groups? If not, would I go to the bugzilla and file a bug for a
>>> feature request or is there another way to go about it?
>>
>> It's possible to add license groups via an overlay, which means that
>> you can set PORTDIR_OVERLAY="${MY_OVERLAY}" in /etc/make.conf, and
>> then define your license groups in
>> ${MY_OVERLAY}/profiles/license_groups.
>>
>> You can go ahead and file a bug at bugs.gentoo.org if you'd like to
>> have support added for /etc/portage/license_groups.
> 
> How about /etc/portage/profile? Won't that work?

No, because profiles/license_groups is somewhat of a misnomer since the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Pacho Ramos | 1 Feb 2011 18:35
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Packages up for grabs

Hello

As you probably know, dotnet team is really small (for now, only
Alistair and me are taking care) and some of packages maintained by
dotnet team are a headache to maintain.

For now I would like to drop dev-dotnet/edtftpnet maintainership

The reasons for this are:
1. It's only keyworded on x86 and I mainly use amd64, then, I have never
used it.
2. Version is tree is really old, but I haven't tried to bump it since I
don't know how to test it works ok.
3. It was added years ago by Jurek and I don't know if any of you uses
it :-/

Feel free to take it if you wantand, if you want to take any other
"dotnet" package, please contact us ;-)

Or even better, if you want to join dotnet... it would be really
appreciated :-D

Thanks a lot
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |

Gmane