| 1 |
On 08/21/2013 07:04 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> It's time of year again to consider moving a few arches to dev-only status. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I propose the following arches to lose their stable keywords |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> - s390 |
| 9 |
> - sh |
| 10 |
> - ia64 |
| 11 |
> - alpha |
| 12 |
> - m68k |
| 13 |
> - sparc |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Mips, as you know, has been ~arch for a while and we've been doing just |
| 17 |
fine with it. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
We can't pretend, however, that this doesn't shift some burden to the |
| 20 |
user. One example is perl where some modules need 5.12.4 (the current |
| 21 |
stable) and cannot use 5.16.x (~arch). On mips you might emerge 5.16.3 |
| 22 |
only to hit a module later that insists on 5.12.4, thus requiring |
| 23 |
downgrading. There are other examples where dependencies track stable |
| 24 |
but not unstable. This is in addition to the usual breakage on the |
| 25 |
bleeding edge. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> If I get enough positive feedback on this, I will propose this in the |
| 30 |
> next Council's agenda. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
Or no serious negative feedback. I don't think you will. I can support |
| 33 |
this. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 37 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 38 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 39 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 40 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives