Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-osx
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-osx: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-osx@g.o
From: Grobian <grobian@g.o>
Subject: Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 22:39:17 +0200
You better pick me as a victim, instead of an innocent, just interested 
user on the mailing list.


Hasan Khalil wrote:
> 
> On Sep 4, 2005, at 24:00, Finn Thain wrote:
> 
>> Are there known bugs with the ~ppc-macos baselayout?
> 
> Yes and no. There are design issues still in the works with it. I think 
> that the general consensus is that it's definitely _not_ ready for 
> prime-time, yet.
> 
>> Yes, and if devs used stable, that would improve QA also. If the dev that
>> keyworded qt was using stable, s/he would have found that the qt deps 
>> were
>> wrong because they don't include the baselayout requirement.
> 
> Uh, no? The x11-libs/qt deps are indeed correct. Please do your homework 
> before posting to this list; you should read up on Gentoo policy about 
> DEPENDS and packages that are in 'system', such as baselayout.
> 
> Should Gentoo policy change, I would have absolutely no problem (and 
> would actually encourage) adding 'virtual/baselayout' to DEPENDS where 
> necessary. Brian Harring has also discussed this on gentoo-dev, in 
> relation to 'BDEPENDS'.
> 
>> Well, moving stable packages to testing also creates a misnomer.
> 
> Again, do your homework. Stable packages are a subset of testing 
> packages for any given arch. By specifying '~arch' in your KEYWORDS (in 
> /etc/make.conf), you are actually implicitly specifying 'arch'.
> 
>> Can someone explain what is to be gained from this that cannot be 
>> achieved
>> with automated builds (e.g. to weed out the badly broken stable packages
>> and check the deps of the ~ppc-macos packages); as well as a policy to
>> relax the "30 day" rule?
> 
> What automated builds? AFAIK, we don't have an automated build system, 
> and one won't exist for a Real Long Time(tm). Once it does, I'm all for 
> keeping a stable branch. Until then, I find that keeping a stable branch 
> is way more work than we can keep up with, for all the reasons cited in 
> my previous message(s) to this list.
> 
> I don't mean to sound rude, here; I apologize in advance if I do. Please 
> don't take any of this personally.

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X
-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list


References:
on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Grobian
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Nick Dimiduk
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Finn Thain
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Grobian
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Lina Pezzella
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Finn Thain
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
-- Hasan Khalil
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-osx: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
Next by thread:
Re: on stable and unstable ppc-macos
Previous by date:
Re: Arch Testing Policy and Procedures
Next by date:
Re: Arch Testing Policy and Procedures


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-osx mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.