| 1 |
On 19-04-2008 16:07:19 -0500, matt hull wrote: |
| 2 |
>> Due to numerous occasions of b0rkerage in the bootstrap snapshots, |
| 3 |
>> bootstrapping has failed. A selection of issues that come up: |
| 4 |
>> - XXXX/YYYYY-p.q is the latest version in the snapshot, but this version |
| 5 |
>> has been removed, and its distfiles have become unavailable (e.g. |
| 6 |
>> rsync-3.0.0_pre2) |
| 7 |
>> - XXXX/YYYYY-p.q was added in the snapshot, but breaks several packages |
| 8 |
>> (e.g. gcc-4.3.0) |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> perhaps we need to keep older versions for bootstrap ? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I don't think that's a problem. In general the highest version in the |
| 13 |
tree is used at the moment due to our single keywordness. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
>> To aid the pre-sync stage, I am considering to switch to usign stable |
| 16 |
>> keywords for the system packages *only*. That is, the bootstrap process |
| 17 |
>> is done with stable keywords, all other packages remain ~arch and hence |
| 18 |
>> a user has to add ~arch to ACCEPT_KEYWORDS after bootstrapping finishes. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> i would think it would be better to use stable and testing like normal. i |
| 21 |
> would like to try to keep stable here. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
That's very unlikely to happen from my point of view. For that we |
| 24 |
really need a bunch of devs that are going to maintain the stable |
| 25 |
keywords like the arch teams currently do for gentoo-x86. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 30 |
Gentoo on a different level |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives