Re: [gentoo-dev] dev-php mass package stabilization (ATTN non-x86 arches)

[Robin H. Johnson]

Apologies for the out-of-order response, but it makes more sense this
way.

> 2- Why not file a bug about it to ppc & sparc?
Perhaps I misjudged the sparc devs, and my apologies for that, but on
bugs in the past with PPC (I cite #32774 as a prime bug still open,
lacking response from the PPC team), I've had a less than acceptable
response (a note once a month is fine by me, that's not asking much) on
bugs, but a great response on the mailing lists.

On Mon, Jul 05, 2004 at 09:53:04AM -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote:
> >For PPC and Sparc only: If I don't get any response on it in 48 hours,
> >I'll consider that as you know of no bugs stopping the packages from
> >being marked stable, and mark them stable for your arches myself.
This part of my message was specifically intended for the large list of
PEAR packages, with nearly 200 days in ~unstable for the great majority
of them. With the exception of one PEAR package, the only arches that
have the packages keyworded are x86, sparc, ppc and alpha. Alpha is
reasonably active in marking the packages stable, while PPC and Sparc
have ebuilds untouched for 500+ days (pre-dating myself as a developer).

> Hi. Just two questions:
> 1- Did you at least test-compile php/mod_php/php-cgi on sparc?
One of my co-workers uses ~sparc on a production box that serves stuff
up with mod_php + php-cgi, so I'm damn certain it works. I can't make
the same claim for PPC, but from the lack of bugs from 4.3.7 directly,
and the number of 4.3.6 users I've told to use unstable for 4.3.7 to get
around a known bug in 4.3.7, I'm reasonably certain it works perfectly
fine.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@××××××××××××××.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85