| 1 |
Samuli Suominen schrieb: |
| 2 |
> On 10/01/2011 08:02 PM, Chi-Thanh Christopher Nguyen (chithanh) wrote: |
| 3 |
>> chithanh 11/10/01 17:02:59 |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Added: metadata.xml ChangeLog qutecom-2.2_p20110210.ebuild |
| 6 |
>> Log: |
| 7 |
>> Bring back qutecom. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Bringing back version of qutecom, that is forcing downgrade on |
| 10 |
> linux-headers, when >= 2.6.38 is being stabilized is completely |
| 11 |
> unacceptable. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Please point to existing authoritative documentation which says that |
| 14 |
downgrades are unacceptable. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> It is NOT gentoo-x86 compatible package in it's current form. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
It sets correct dependency on an existing ebuild in tree. The dependency |
| 19 |
is only build time, users can upgrade linux-headers again afterwards. |
| 20 |
The application itself is v4l2 compatible. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
What I am a bit unhappy about is that the package was masked and removed |
| 23 |
while I was away. Even bypassing the usual 30 days and no last rite |
| 24 |
announcement was sent to -dev. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Bug 361181 is certainly on my TODO list, just not very high up to now. |
| 27 |
If you think that there is some urgency in getting rid of the package, |
| 28 |
please do explain so in advance. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Best regards, |
| 32 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
Archives