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 EF4C61381F3 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 21:02:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D765621C06E for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 21:02:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from amun.cheops.bitzolder.nl (amun.cheops.bitzolder.nl [83.161.135.166]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4138221C094 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2012 18:16:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nut.cheops.bitzolder.nl ([172.17.2.83] helo=gentoo.org) by amun.cheops.bitzolder.nl with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1TWWdy-0003mX-KA for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 19:16:00 +0100 Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 19:15:57 +0100 From: Fabian Groffen To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 November 2012, 19:00 UTC Message-ID: <20121108181557.GP83592@gentoo.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <20121106212816.GE82762@gentoo.org> <20121108174548.GB3842@linux1> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5PFZVUeDPxlnBcQp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121108174548.GB3842@linux1> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (Darwin 11.4.2, VIM - Vi IMproved 7.3) Organization: Gentoo Foundation, Inc. X-Content-Scanned: by amun.cheops.bitzolder.nl (Exim Exiscan) using SpamAssassin and ClamAV X-Archives-Salt: eda5119c-5bcd-4753-b07b-eae681451db6 X-Archives-Hash: b1be0a676a843ee17a95d5c219f1a686 --5PFZVUeDPxlnBcQp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 08-11-2012 11:45:48 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > > - approve/disapprove removal of gen_usr_ldscript >=20 > A better way to put this is disabling gen_usr_ldscript on Linux. > Some of the alternate platforms still use it, so I do not advocate > killing the function. > If we go forward with the plan, there is no reason the council should > reject disabling gen_usr_ldscript on Linux that I am aware of. >=20 > This also has to wait until the blockers are resolved on the tracker. Do you suggest to drop the point from the agenda? I'd love that. > > - define timeframe > > * 30 days > > * 6 months > > * 1 year > =20 > Once the blockers are done and we release a news item, implementing > one of the choices is a matter of emerging a package, possibly running a > command (genkernel with the appropriate options) and updating your boot > loader configuration before your next reboot. >=20 > Considering that we are holding back stabilizations of more and more > packages the longer we wait, is it really a good idea to extend the time > frame to 6 months or a year? Yes. I don't think it is reasonable to have a very short timeframe for having to make such a potentially dangerous change. Fabian --=20 Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level --5PFZVUeDPxlnBcQp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAlCb9t0ACgkQX3X2B8XHTonhKwCfXjj0/OiArxUMcUkkcFrttdLo k4oAn0mEYm7det+VBxipzUNCROT7ilzl =8zWk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5PFZVUeDPxlnBcQp--