1 |
You better pick me as a victim, instead of an innocent, just interested |
2 |
user on the mailing list. |
3 |
|
4 |
|
5 |
Hasan Khalil wrote: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> On Sep 4, 2005, at 24:00, Finn Thain wrote: |
8 |
> |
9 |
>> Are there known bugs with the ~ppc-macos baselayout? |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Yes and no. There are design issues still in the works with it. I think |
12 |
> that the general consensus is that it's definitely _not_ ready for |
13 |
> prime-time, yet. |
14 |
> |
15 |
>> Yes, and if devs used stable, that would improve QA also. If the dev that |
16 |
>> keyworded qt was using stable, s/he would have found that the qt deps |
17 |
>> were |
18 |
>> wrong because they don't include the baselayout requirement. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> Uh, no? The x11-libs/qt deps are indeed correct. Please do your homework |
21 |
> before posting to this list; you should read up on Gentoo policy about |
22 |
> DEPENDS and packages that are in 'system', such as baselayout. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Should Gentoo policy change, I would have absolutely no problem (and |
25 |
> would actually encourage) adding 'virtual/baselayout' to DEPENDS where |
26 |
> necessary. Brian Harring has also discussed this on gentoo-dev, in |
27 |
> relation to 'BDEPENDS'. |
28 |
> |
29 |
>> Well, moving stable packages to testing also creates a misnomer. |
30 |
> |
31 |
> Again, do your homework. Stable packages are a subset of testing |
32 |
> packages for any given arch. By specifying '~arch' in your KEYWORDS (in |
33 |
> /etc/make.conf), you are actually implicitly specifying 'arch'. |
34 |
> |
35 |
>> Can someone explain what is to be gained from this that cannot be |
36 |
>> achieved |
37 |
>> with automated builds (e.g. to weed out the badly broken stable packages |
38 |
>> and check the deps of the ~ppc-macos packages); as well as a policy to |
39 |
>> relax the "30 day" rule? |
40 |
> |
41 |
> What automated builds? AFAIK, we don't have an automated build system, |
42 |
> and one won't exist for a Real Long Time(tm). Once it does, I'm all for |
43 |
> keeping a stable branch. Until then, I find that keeping a stable branch |
44 |
> is way more work than we can keep up with, for all the reasons cited in |
45 |
> my previous message(s) to this list. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> I don't mean to sound rude, here; I apologize in advance if I do. Please |
48 |
> don't take any of this personally. |
49 |
|
50 |
-- |
51 |
Fabian Groffen |
52 |
Gentoo for Mac OS X |
53 |
-- |
54 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |