| 1 |
On Monday 21 May 2012 19:01:04 Francesco Riosa wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2012/5/22 Mike Frysinger: |
| 3 |
> > On Monday 21 May 2012 18:16:25 Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> Excuse me but the way this change was handled is a bit depressing. |
| 5 |
> >> First, the ebuilds should have been fixed to inherit eutils and then |
| 6 |
> >> remove eutils from autotools. Now, a bunch of ebuilds are broken out |
| 7 |
> >> of nowhere. I don't believe this issue was that urgent in order to |
| 8 |
> >> justify the significant breakage of portage tree. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > you're assuming the breakage was intentional. i also wouldn't really |
| 11 |
> > describe it as "significant", but that's just quibbling over an |
| 12 |
> > insignificant aspect. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> It's intentional not to revert the change, it's significant because it |
| 15 |
> involve a number of significant packages like icu, vim and boost, some |
| 16 |
> of them already marked stable (from a fast grep from the one mentioned |
| 17 |
> in the previous posts). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
you've identified the broke things. so fix them. |
| 20 |
-mike |
Archives