Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 1.x and GNOME 1.x dependent package masking
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 08:00:43
Message-Id: 20061110085620.31b41252@delenn.genone.homeip.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 1.x and GNOME 1.x dependent package masking by Marius Mauch
1 On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 09:10:37 +0100
2 Marius Mauch <genone@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 03:23:42 +0000
5 > Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd@g.o> wrote:
6 >
7 > > Description:
8 > > GNOME 1.x is no longer supported by upstream GNOME developers.
9 > > Maintaining GNOME 1.x adds unnecessary complexity to the Gentoo
10 > > GNOME developers' workload. Some of the contributing factors are
11 > > security vulnerabilities, as-needed fixes, and general breakages
12 > > over time due to lower level package changes.
13 > >
14 > > Resolution:
15 > > The GNOME herd has decided to remove GNOME 1.x and its dependent
16 > > packages from the tree. GTK+-1 and glib-1 will not be removed at
17 > > this time however. Effective a week from this message (15/11/2006),
18 > > the attached package list will be masked for 30 days and then the
19 > > packages will be removed from the tree on (15/12/2006).
20 > >
21 > > How to dispute the resolution:
22 > > 1) You can comment on bug #154102, OR
23 > > 2) Contact the GNOME herd on freenode in #gentoo-desktop, OR
24 > > 3) Email the herd lead, allanonjl@g.o
25 > >
26 > > Please do NOT reply to this message with a reason why package X
27 > > should not be masked. If you feel strongly about a package, please
28 > > port it to GTK+-2 and submit patches on a new bug.
29 >
30 > Could you provide the script that generated those lists (or was it
31 > done manually)? I'm not so sure that it is accurate, at least I can't
32 > see why <sylpheed-claws-2 is in the list (the only relevant
33 > unconditional dep is gtk-1).
34
35 Ok, the list definitely isn't accurate. If there is a legitimate reason
36 to mask sylpheed-claws-1.x you also have to mask it's reverse deps.
37 However I'm still waiting for the explanation why it is on that list.
38 (I don't mind if it's masked for a good reason, but I need to know
39 that reason).
40
41 Marius
42
43 --
44 Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub
45
46 In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
47 Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] GNOME 1.x and GNOME 1.x dependent package masking Daniel Gryniewicz <dang@g.o>