List Archive: gentoo-pms
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
>>>>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2010, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 00:42:01 +0100
> Christian Faulhammer <email@example.com> wrote:
>> as I now learnt, Bash 3.2 vanilla is not enough for some eclasses
>> to run. Patchlevel 48 is needed.
What eclasses are this? _p48 isn't marked as stable.
>> Should we tighten the version string for Bash?
I don't think there's a need for this, as the patches are only
> Didn't the Council say that if it ever happened again, there should
> be forced reverts rather than updating PMS retroactively?
Yes, but any =bash-3.2* is still allowed:
| Vote (6 yes, 1 no): Ebuilds must be completely parsable with
| =bash-3.2*, any use of later bash features will be reverted.
See also the log  where the example of 3.2_p39 is explicitly
mentioned at one point.