List Archive: gentoo-alt
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On 25-03-2009 00:30:18 -0500, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> So, since we are already in a hugely reactive mode..why don't we just
> get rid of prefix keywords completely? It gets hairy if the arch most
> always needs patches (FreeMiNT/IRIX comes to mind). However, this is one
> reason that we ask for everyone's help in submitting patches upstream.
- "use <keyword> && bla" will no longer work (question; is it sane? well
we need it in *DEPENDs at the moment for sure)
- Portage needs to be patched not to look at keywords any more, solar's
idea involved only having explicit -arch markings for stuff known not
- I don't like the idea:
> Before anyone says "but, that will be much more likely to break my
> prefix" - I refute that because we are already running on this policy
> with regards to the automatic bumps. For the most part, it is smooth.
> Major packages are masked if someone hasn't tested them yet (eg. gcc & bash)
Thing is here, that if you look at
http://stats.prefix.freens.org/keywords-packages.png, you can clearly
see a "gap" between x86-linux, and ppc-macos (the prefix leader in
keyworded packages). From an historical point of view, I'm almost
sure this gap is largely consisting of broken packages for ppc-macos.
- Last but not least, this proposal doesn't solve the keyword issue at
all, it just introduces another hurdle; the change of keyword use.
Or did I mis the point?
Gentoo on a different level