Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: Finn Thain <fthain@××××××××××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] sci-biology stable requests
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 09:17:39
Message-Id: Pine.LNX.4.63.0510081858270.20626@loopy.telegraphics.com.au
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] sci-biology stable requests by Grobian
1 On Sat, 8 Oct 2005, Grobian wrote:
2
3 > Because an older package is stable, we are somehow forced to continue
4 > stabling newer packages if requested either via a stabling request or
5 > security issue. In the first case we have to stable to allow older
6 > ebuilds to be cleaned up, in the second we have to table in order to
7 > take advantage of the security advisory. See the "Ruby issue" email for
8 > how to deal with packages that obviously noone knows what to do with.
9 >
10 > > Sorry if I somehow missed an e-mail detailing this;
11 >
12 > You haven't, it was in my initial proposal. You trigger me to put this
13 > somewhere on the web for reference.
14
15 I think you are referring to this proposal?
16
17 "I propose to keep the following keywording rules for whatever we do from
18 now:
19 1) only keyword new packages ~ppc-macos; don't stable them after a month
20 2) only stable new ebuilds if this is required by security stuff and we
21 have an older ebuild that is stable"
22
23 Maybe you can add,
24
25 3) if need be, a non-system package may be stabled, even if it has
26 collisions.
27
28 and then add autoconf-2.59 to the Panther base system for the progressive
29 profile, and mask ruby from the Panther conservative profile.
30
31 -f
32 --
33 gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-osx] sci-biology stable requests Grobian <grobian@g.o>