From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1FZvp1-0005fh-Lc for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:13:44 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k3TKCVR6003734; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:12:31 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3TK9E4A006296 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:09:15 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5090B642D3 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:09:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 28992-19 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:09:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.gnqs.org (myrddraal.demon.co.uk [62.49.28.63]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB5D3642C0 for ; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 20:09:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.160.3] (helo=demandred) by mail.gnqs.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FZvkZ-0001Jk-0t; Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:09:08 +0100 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: nxserver-freenx-0.5.0 to be masked From: Stuart Herbert To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <1146258369.2967.14.camel@demandred.gnqs.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-rIIzF5F8MznDyPmnzpHA" Organization: Gentoo Linux Project Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 21:09:05 +0100 Message-Id: <1146341345.29589.25.camel@demandred.gnqs.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "demandred.gnqs.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 00:41 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > Stuart Herbert wrote: > What is the reason for the mask? Modular Xorg incompatibility in nx-x11? Because it should not have been unmasked in the first place. That was a mistake on my part, to not notice that I hadn't masked it when I masked everything else. [...] Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.464 required=5.5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.135] X-Spam-Score: -2.464 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: f3e59f5f-bf5f-4148-b447-492e41daaa05 X-Archives-Hash: ff9424646f7dc09831a9f732791df148 --=-rIIzF5F8MznDyPmnzpHA Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 00:41 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > Stuart Herbert wrote: > What is the reason for the mask? Modular Xorg incompatibility in nx-x11? Because it should not have been unmasked in the first place. That was a mistake on my part, to not notice that I hadn't masked it when I masked everything else. > I guess "testing" does not really count after two months in ~x86 It's an ebuild for an old snapshot of freenx. We have better ebuilds in the NX overlay, thanks to Jon Scruggs and everyone who's been contributing via bugzilla. Those ebuilds will be moved into Portage asap, just as soon as I've caught up on my code reviewing. The feedback from visitors to #gentoo-nx has been very positive (although I believe printing remains an issue atm). > By the way masking something afterwards is bad habit because it will caus= e > downgrades. Downgrades can be harmful because they can cause bugs to come > up again that have been fixed in the latest version. I'll time this so that the mask is added along with the latest ebuilds, so that, although it will look like a downgrade, what users will get will be much better. Best regards, Stu --=20 Stuart Herbert stuart@gentoo.org Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ http://blog.stuartherbert.com/ GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint =3D 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C -- --=-rIIzF5F8MznDyPmnzpHA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEU8fhDC+AuvmvxXwRAm9dAJ9sLxPT1+dba5KQc70a9Iy2fJb5RQCgh2YD 0el+HFAQwt5C9XSugSoJS7s= =5TWA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-rIIzF5F8MznDyPmnzpHA-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list