From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB6A138010 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 04:23:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7409F21C017; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 04:23:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05606E0084 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 04:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78E3C33D751 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 04:22:43 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 00:22:50 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.5.2; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) References: In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5604025.MuFtrrfFTL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201210150022.51254.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 247d4368-fed8-46d0-928d-93e90702fcc9 X-Archives-Hash: 5dcfb3a214de2d46e382f1a61c943fcd --nextPart5604025.MuFtrrfFTL Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sunday 14 October 2012 11:42:32 Ben Kohler wrote: > I hope this discussion doesn't end when the warnings are removed. These > server profiles are still useless and misleading, they do not need to exi= st > in their current form. Your previous statement that these are the most > minimal profiles, is not accurate. The base profiles are the most minimal > (non-selinux) ones. please stop top posting. you're making a mess of this whole thread. sounds like we should extend the profiles.desc file or profile structure to= =20 include a description so that people know the intention of each one. the o= nly=20 marker we had before was implicitly in the name (".../server" and=20 ".../desktop"). =2Dmike --nextPart5604025.MuFtrrfFTL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJQe4+bAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBNIwP/3axS1CAgQTVuucEcPBVboxV 7xFkUEds379by3Rbw7ql0EuXzS3fN2S+efvUBjIbEOJ51kaiDLhd9xTx7YSNqqUp Hk7EmpjuzN1Dg1enXEUn3SUFQ0vaLDt8gapNWnTKVDE8oFCEryXYO03yKG9pV7d3 Y6Y1Yy2of0T7WtPrTSU0NorTFBpQj6qhB4hBWUzyRWRdQafGLrA4PM4mQ28PI2yZ EFKWVJLJDdwglIeUtQbStHwWJ/A7IOGSfLA5SivEqyHGJcrU+PKEjEVocIP58bZh k4lE/yf4za1G5cQ2DE6mhqPwNXrP1tYBsrzT0kuhTe/XionHOjigcM+ZJlIMVEkn s9NEXm5lY1godhVaJnPD4V9CzLXxY/x3fYqacOWHxc9nOrMou0v1yWThsj2Q6p2B pR6zb4ycOkIMqwpclw5yedAjl+1glMHa8549fhLY1RlOiBkLy0MXf/KKJF/JT1tV ghdhLM62W95N44EGzZ3LwnETYZqCIV7Ee4huvLoFxKeAEwBTNWRxwKFtG3rIKUJc OSN9qBk8GQRyAsx2izXi9lxEYy9Pq9I4judu4ZL83bGX/iZskKOXCk5m3wfisKK7 Bdl5ERNsh0dcwrfug6L2YpoY90aWb9k7+GrXLE4qt+SjyzuipwgaV3snaVV6u85/ UKYBCqaxp7hrgHvQa/fQ =KeOY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5604025.MuFtrrfFTL--