| 1 |
Thomas Cort wrote: |
| 2 |
> What package(s) are going stable in 1 week? I have no clue what you are |
| 3 |
> writing about since you didn't mention it in your e-mail. I did a |
| 4 |
> quick search and found the following 6 packages which have a version |
| 5 |
> 2.6.18: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> gentoo-sources-2.6.18 |
| 8 |
> linux-headers-2.6.18 |
| 9 |
> suspend2-sources-2.6.18 |
| 10 |
> usermode-sources-2.6.18 |
| 11 |
> vanilla-sources-2.6.18 |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Sorry about that. I was referring to gentoo-sources, which is really the |
| 14 |
only truly supported kernel (excluding some arch-specific ones). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> You also neglected to mention which architectures are going stable. Are |
| 17 |
> all arches going stable at the same time (in 1 week)? Will you still |
| 18 |
> go ahead with the stable marking if http://bugs.gentoo.org/148429 is |
| 19 |
> not resolved? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
x86 and amd64 immediately, and assuming they don't have showstoppers, |
| 22 |
ppc/ppc64/sparc usually follow up real quick. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Yes, it will go stable even if some dependencies of bug 148429 are not |
| 25 |
fixed. These are *not* kernel bugs, they are bugs in the individual |
| 26 |
packages. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
However, I don't ignore them, I have already put many hours into fixing |
| 29 |
those bugs. I have been through every bug listed there and provided |
| 30 |
fixes/workarounds to all of them. I expect to have to spend even more |
| 31 |
time chasing up maintainers of the unfixed packages there. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
This is becoming a real problem for me as I'm having to waste excessive |
| 34 |
amounts of time on every kernel release fixing bugs in packages which |
| 35 |
are nothing to do with me. I'm considering dropping stable keywords from |
| 36 |
repeat offenders, but really there aren't any of those: external kernel |
| 37 |
packages are almost guaranteed to break every once in a while, and we |
| 38 |
simply have a large number of these packages which aren't given much |
| 39 |
attention by their maintainers. Any suggestions here are appreciated. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Daniel |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
P.S. The tone of your email didn't offend me, but that's probably |
| 44 |
because I completely agreed with it. Andrew is certainly right in that |
| 45 |
we should be really careful about how we write things. |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives