1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> Here's the deal. We have a new user that installs Gentoo. After |
3 |
> installing Gentoo, he tries to "emerge nagios" and it dies on building |
4 |
> apache over a bug that has been known for some time and still isn't |
5 |
> resolved. How exactly does that make us look? How exactly does that |
6 |
> make Release Engineering look when a "default install" cannot even |
7 |
> install apache properly? APACHE!!! Whether we are responsible for |
8 |
> apache or not, we *are* responsible for the release. Having things |
9 |
> completely broken in the default install is *not* acceptable. The bug |
10 |
> was reported in June and while there has been some action in the bug, no |
11 |
> fix has been issued. Again, this is *not* acceptable. Now, because of |
12 |
> this, it is my determination that we have a serious problem that *will* |
13 |
> affect the 2006.0 release, and I am trying to do something proactive to |
14 |
> prevent it. |
15 |
> |
16 |
|
17 |
Case in point: I built a fresh, iso downloaded this weekend from w.g.o, |
18 |
and i failed to bring portage up to date before installing the stable |
19 |
apache2 - and what i got was broken because it was lacking the enewuser |
20 |
for apache (it built, installed, etc. - just couldn't run without either |
21 |
manually adding the user or syncing the dead-end box). And this was on a |
22 |
100% stable box using the iso at |
23 |
http://bouncer.gentoo.org/?product=gentoo-2005.1-install-minimum&os=x86 |
24 |
(link off the where page). |
25 |
|
26 |
OK, so I'm not bright for not syncing before starting emerging - but i |
27 |
can't imagine a new to gentoo user, not quite up with the "portage |
28 |
changes by the nanosecond" would think to sync after building from a livecd. |
29 |
|
30 |
just my two <insert monatary system here> worth :) |
31 |
|
32 |
~mcummings |
33 |
-- |
34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |