1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
Miguel Filipe wrote: |
4 |
> I've been trying to emerge gcc 4.0.2-r2, messing with |
5 |
> /etc/portage/package.unmask & /etc/portage/package.keywords |
6 |
> without success.. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> the portage man page says that if a package has -* is know to be broken |
9 |
> on all arches otherwise mentioned. |
10 |
> So is 4.0.1, 4.0.0, 4.1-snapshot.. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> I would expect it to be at least marked unstable "~amd64 .." |
13 |
|
14 |
I hope you really know what you are doing (or trying to do). gcc-4.0 isn't |
15 |
broken, but it is hard-masked because there are *major* changes, meaning you |
16 |
should rebuild your whole system with it once you upgraded. That's why it is not |
17 |
yet ~amd64 and we want to give it a long testing period. Another issue is that |
18 |
gcc-4.0 is even stricter than 3.4, meaning lots of packages won't build anymore. |
19 |
That's why we marked it -*, because we don't want to disappoint normal users who |
20 |
aren't familiar with writing patches. And those who are, are clever enough to |
21 |
unmask a hard masked package, it's not that hard after all. |
22 |
|
23 |
> gentoo seems to have major problems in keeping up with the public |
24 |
> releases.. its starting to look like debian stable.... |
25 |
|
26 |
Is this a 'i want to help'? |
27 |
|
28 |
> also.. I don't see the point in having 3 types of tags: stable, |
29 |
> unstable, broken.. maybe the same point of (stable, testing, unstable.. |
30 |
> ala debian) |
31 |
|
32 |
You're mixing up quite unrelated things. -* is generally used for packages that |
33 |
are only available for one or two arch (typical example: binary packages). When |
34 |
it means 'broken', then it is only in the tree because it makes it easier for |
35 |
devs to share ebuilds which they (and of course the 'advanced' users) can test. |
36 |
|
37 |
> Nevermind, basically, I'm using gentoo since 1.0rc6 and starting to be |
38 |
> disapointed by the slowness of having fresh software available.. |
39 |
|
40 |
If you feel more adventurous, use package.(unmask|keywords). It's a wonderful |
41 |
tool to let the user decide himself what is stable enough for him. |
42 |
|
43 |
> gnome 2.12 came out 7 of september, maybe when gnome 2.14 is out I can |
44 |
> find it keyworded "amd64".. |
45 |
|
46 |
Again, package.keywords if you agree. Since 1.0rc6, Gentoo has changed a lot. |
47 |
We've got a huge user base, and we really don't feel like getting the same bug |
48 |
reported 10 times just because we marked some untested piece of software stable. |
49 |
It won't make most users very happy either, especially those who want a system |
50 |
that 'just works'. |
51 |
|
52 |
> In conclusion, package mantainance needs a new organizational way to scale.. |
53 |
> Or should I simply move to ~amd64, just like any debian user sets its |
54 |
> system to testing without thinking twice, just after the install. |
55 |
|
56 |
Moving to ~amd64 could be the right thing for you. But if you're running ~amd64 |
57 |
and get tons of bugs, don't bitch. Personally, I think everybody who runs ~amd64 |
58 |
should be filing bugs whenever he hits one. If you don't want to do that, keep |
59 |
your system stable. |
60 |
|
61 |
Regards, |
62 |
|
63 |
-- |
64 |
Simon Stelling |
65 |
Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead |
66 |
blubb@g.o |
67 |
-- |
68 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |