| 1 |
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:48:15AM +0100, Tom???? Chv??tal wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2011/11/11 Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>: |
| 3 |
> The build issue was with -cups so useflag was removed and hard |
| 4 |
> dependency enabled, fine with me. |
| 5 |
> But why the fuck the bump was issued next day still hard-depending on |
| 6 |
> it and in day after that this commit arrived in: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/www-client/chromium/chromium-16.0.912.32.ebuild?r1=1.1&r2=1.2 |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> You are telling me this is build time failure fix, you are telling me |
| 11 |
> that people that already had pulled in that cups could not sleep |
| 12 |
> thanks to it and survive for another week to get the flag back with |
| 13 |
> bump? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I'm telling you to stop fucking bitching about running unstable |
| 16 |
software that probably is the fastest moving upstream in the tree in |
| 17 |
terms of versions, nor the simplest fucking thing to maintain, let |
| 18 |
alone keep everyone happy. Libreoffice I have no doubt is a pain in |
| 19 |
the ass to maintain, but I'd take it over chromium any day of the |
| 20 |
week. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Realize you're ranting on the ML because /you choose to run unstable/ |
| 23 |
and don't like that it's changing to deal w/ bugs (let alone the fast |
| 24 |
release cycle of dev channel which you're on). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Specifically, you're ranting, and I strongly suspect you didn't bother |
| 27 |
talking to the people directly beyond firing off bitching to the ML. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Nice and friendly, that. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
As I said, looking through the logs it looks like this isn't |
| 32 |
arbitrary random fucking around w/ ebuilds as you're implying above. |
| 33 |
Is the cups situation a fuckup? Perhaps, but in digging through the |
| 34 |
logs it ain't seeming like it's the norm. It's more seeming like |
| 35 |
you're just venting about changes that went out fixing chromium |
| 36 |
building for others, and you had to rebuild. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Productive courses of action, enumerated: |
| 39 |
1) change your user configuration. You chose to run unstable after |
| 40 |
all. |
| 41 |
2) talk w/ the devs directly w/ suggestions of how to slow the |
| 42 |
releases (doesn't frankly seem all that viable, but hey, it's your |
| 43 |
time to burn). Keep in mind your original suggestion was to leave |
| 44 |
shit broke in unstable (but hey, at least you don't have to |
| 45 |
recompile). |
| 46 |
3) add an optional feature to portage enabling you to control the |
| 47 |
frequency of rebuilds for an unstable pkg. This way you get your |
| 48 |
bleeding edge, just control the level of pain. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Non-produtive courses of action, enumerated: |
| 51 |
1) bitching on an ML cc'ing the maintainers rather than going to the |
| 52 |
maintainers directly. |
| 53 |
2) continuing to argue with me. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
~brian |
Archives