| 1 |
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:44:43 -0500 |
| 2 |
"John Davis" <zhen@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Expect this to happen time to time with releases. Since we no longer |
| 5 |
> have a 'package freeze', issues like this will be encountered. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Last minute changes like this though seem to be more due to a lack of |
| 8 |
proper planning than some ultra crucial bug or security fix. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> I would say that by the end of this week (the 16th), you will be safe to |
| 11 |
> make a final snapshot. The purpose of this testing week was to identify |
| 12 |
> things like the openssl problem ;) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Then I will not be able to have anything ready to release at LWE, which |
| 15 |
was the purpose of the original release date. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Not all architectures can build the components for a release in the time |
| 18 |
that x86 and faster PPCs can. I know this point comes back up every |
| 19 |
release cycle, but the behavior does not change. Even on a fast sparc64 |
| 20 |
box, it'll still take close to a week to build everything (stages, GRP |
| 21 |
and LiveCD), granted there are no problems. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Perhaps I'm unfair in this assessment, but because of repetitive problems |
| 24 |
like this, I really feel like non-x86 arches are like 2nd class citizens. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> I know this may be frustrating, but hang in there. As far as I know, |
| 27 |
> openssl and baselayout are the only system packages that are going to be |
| 28 |
> bumped, and they should both be bumped by Friday (brad willing :) ). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Yes, this is extremely frustrating when trying provide quality releases in |
| 31 |
a timely fashion. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Jason Wever |
| 35 |
Gentoo/Sparc Team Co-Lead |
Archives