Finn Thain wrote:
> I'm curious, is this really a binary compatibility issue, or just a 
> portability problem in libsigsegv?

At risk of sounding rather alarmist, I assert the *potential* for binary 
compatibility issues.  Panther's developer tools are not compatible with 
Tiger (and vice versa) because Apple changes things with each release. 
API changes, different gcc version, etc.

This example is a portability issue for libsigsegv.  I'm no expert in 
imake, but as I understand it, the configure script isn't picky enough 
about darwin version and in this case there is an incompatibility 
between versions (as we saw between darwin5 and darwin7 in the 2.1 release).

Just because we know something builds on Tiger does not mean it builds 
on Panther.  We know that.  Which is why I think we need a better way to 
further clarify compatibility of ebuilds (better than package.mask).  I 
don't want to keyword something on my Tiger system and have it break 
someone's Panther system.  We claim support for Panther.  Have we ever 
officially supported Tiger?  Did we ever decide to focus on one release 
over the other?  Do we test both systems before a keyword?

I'd also like to point out that just because a package builds doesn't 
mean it works.  Was it tested?  Did it come with testing facilities?  Do 
the tests pass on both Tiger and Panther?

Do we have a QA person?  I've been away for a while, but I thought we 
had solutions to many of these problems before I went AWOL.
-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list