| 1 |
El mié, 03-11-2021 a las 21:15 -0500, John Helmert III escribió: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 12:09:28AM +0000, Sam James wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 4 Nov 2021, at 00:02, Sam James <sam@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > > On 3 Nov 2021, at 23:53, Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > > Is that where the policy belongs? |
| 6 |
> > > > If so, shouldn't the council update it based on their decisions? |
| 7 |
> > > > "patches are welcome" doesn't fit every scenario. |
| 8 |
> > > Got to agree here. If there's a gap in the documentation, |
| 9 |
> > > let's file a bug -- irrespective of if someone is going to give |
| 10 |
> > > a patch. |
| 11 |
> > > Just commenting this on the ML means it'll get lost |
| 12 |
> > > and we'll forget about it... |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Filed https://bugs.gentoo.org/821553. Please |
| 15 |
> > feel free to clarify it. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Thank you! Many of us apparently have differing interpretations of the |
| 18 |
> policy (and it's somewhat hidden), so a clear policy in an obvious |
| 19 |
> place will be a huge improvement! |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I haven't tried yet as, fortunately, I have been able to deal with the conflicts |
| 23 |
most of the times but, I was wondering if one workaround would be to simply try |
| 24 |
to use emerge-webrsync --revert= option. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
That way, people could try to upgrade their old systems going from the oldest |
| 27 |
tree to, for example, the tree from August of this year. Later they could update |
| 28 |
to a newer snapshot and follow until the end |
Archives