| 1 |
On Fri, 2006-07-21 at 08:17 +0100, Uwe Thiem wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 21 July 2006 04:26, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Duncan wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > I don't see it as... annoying; I see it as... challenging! =8^) |
| 5 |
> > > |
| 6 |
> > > Seriously, computing is my hobby, and as such, it needs to remain a bit |
| 7 |
> > > challenging from time to time, or it would cease to be of interest. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Just out of curiosity, are there three "versions" -- stable, testing and |
| 10 |
> > unstable -- or just two -- stable and unstable? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Three. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Umm... what's the other KEYWORDS set, then? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I know of 3 actual sets, but they're different than you think. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
arch - stable |
| 19 |
~arch - package is stable, but the ebuilds needs testing |
| 20 |
-arch - package is known not to work on this architecture |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Beyond that, there is package.mask, which is supposed to be used for any |
| 23 |
packages that have had only limited testing, shown poor stability, or |
| 24 |
have unresolved security problems. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 28 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 29 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 30 |
Games - Developer |
| 31 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives