| 1 |
Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday 08 November 2004 11:02, Alexander Holler wrote: |
| 3 |
... |
| 4 |
> It really seems to me like you are trolling. The first email you sent was done |
| 5 |
> so after getting frustrated with Mike Frysinger's (vapier) closing of the |
| 6 |
> "versioned eclasses" bug. Yet, what you are talking about here is absolutely |
| 7 |
> nothing to do with that. You made most of the same statements on the bug, but |
| 8 |
> they were off-topic in that bug's context as well. Furthermore, there is |
| 9 |
> already another bug open for that off-topicness. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Yes I'm trolling and I doesn't take care about opening and writing tons |
| 12 |
of bugs if they got ignored or closed as worksforme/wontfix. I've |
| 13 |
written enough bugs and somewhere came to the point that written bugs is |
| 14 |
a useless spend of time. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
In the bug I mentioned in my second post, I explain that the trojan for |
| 17 |
ebuilds is also usable on eclasses (which I've missed because they where |
| 18 |
relativly new and I've never used them). Ok, unrelated according to you. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
And the second post, I also have reminder on the first post, where the |
| 21 |
first bug is mentioned where I explain how a list with hashes would |
| 22 |
help. Ok, very complicated and unrelated too. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> So, let me give you an account of where I see things are at: |
| 25 |
> * SHA1 support is in portage but can't be enabled yet due to compatibility |
| 26 |
> issues. That is, enabling it will prevent user's running <portage-2.0.51 |
| 27 |
> from being able to upgrade. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I still don't understand why just building a list with hashes (maybe |
| 30 |
signed) takes over 2 years. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> * Ebuild signing support is in portage and is starting to be adopted. |
| 33 |
> Presently, there is a push for developer education. |
| 34 |
> * CVS portage now runs most ebuild phases as the portage user rather than |
| 35 |
> root and work is being done to support the last few as well. |
| 36 |
> * Eclass, package and profile signing are all currently being worked on (and |
| 37 |
> had begun before you started trolling) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
You don't have to repeat that "trolling'. I think everyone has |
| 40 |
understood where gentoo is going too. emerge moo! |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> The thing you seem to keep coming back to is why it hasn't already been |
| 43 |
> completed. You've been given the answer to that several times - lack of time |
| 44 |
> and higher priority issues. What I really would like to know is why you are |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Things like FEATURES="candy"? |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
> trying to tie up so much more of the time of the people that you would have |
| 49 |
> implement support for these critical features with these pointless emails? |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Yes I'm totally pointless. It is unbelievable, but I'm too thinking that |
| 52 |
eclasses are totally breaking the ebuild-versioning scheme. I'm so |
| 53 |
pointless, I can't explain why. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Sorry, but as a troll I am, I'm now really leaving this list alone. I |
| 56 |
have to troll. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
Trolling, |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
Alexander |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
-- |
| 63 |
gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |
Archives