| 1 |
Hi |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> are a pain. I had to reboot a system that hadn't been booted in |
| 4 |
> about a year and the modules didn't load because of the changes to |
| 5 |
> modules.autoload. I've had to clean up Apache conf files 'cause they |
| 6 |
> moved. I've had to deal with moving to the new "modular" xorg (and |
| 7 |
> try to hunt down all the X tools I used to have). Not to mention |
| 8 |
> the baselayout changes... |
| 9 |
Well, Xorg was an upstream decision, the config-files for apache where |
| 10 |
simply wrong before, so that had to be fixed, and about the changes in |
| 11 |
modules.autoload, i am not so sure. |
| 12 |
But to the people needing a stable portage tree: It is really a totally |
| 13 |
different ideology which is somewhat diametral to what gentoo does. |
| 14 |
Gentoo does _not_ have real releases, which some people, me included, |
| 15 |
think is a good thing. Also, i think if the security-fixes are just |
| 16 |
backported, I personally believe that unless there are many people |
| 17 |
helping with the effort there will be more bugs introduced by this, as |
| 18 |
most of the time the codes might not know the code base as well. |
| 19 |
Also, you are complaining about the long list of updates when doing a -u |
| 20 |
somewhat. Those are _real_ dependencies, even if they were just imagined |
| 21 |
by some hallucinating gentoo dev ;). So normally there would not be a |
| 22 |
way around installing them. |
| 23 |
But on an infrastructure as big as some are talking about here, there |
| 24 |
usually are few types of servers, so that it can be tested anyway. And |
| 25 |
maybe, those types of companies should be more willing to spend a few |
| 26 |
bucks to the gentoo project, maybe about the new "adopt a gentoo-dev"-page. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Ok, ranted enough ;) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Jonas Fietz |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A GENTOO DEV |
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-server@g.o mailing list |
Archives