Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 02:32:50
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy by Steev Klimaszewski
1 On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 06:58:27PM -0600, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
2 > We actually ran into something along this issue with git.
3 >
4 > Now, arm is an interesting keyword, because for arm, when something
5 > needs to be stabled, we have to test armv4, armv5, armv6, armv6
6 > hardfloat, armv7, armv7 hardfloat, armv7 uclibc.
7 >
8 > In my testing, one known issue was that git on uclibc did (and still
9 > doesn't) work properly starting with git 1.8 - so I noted in the bug
10 > that this was the case, and to NOT stable it for arm. Unfortunately,
11 > someone else on the ARM team disregarded the note and stabled the new
12 > git, then the git maintainers dropped the old versions. Now on arm
13 > uclibc, git is entirely broken and unusable.
14 Ugh, this does suck.
16 Wasn't there a proposal years ago to include the libc in the keyword?
18 --
19 Robin Hugh Johnson
20 Gentoo Linux: Developer, Infrastructure Lead
21 E-Mail : robbat2@g.o
22 GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Steev Klimaszewski <steev@g.o>