Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] x86 2004.2 Profile
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 16:09:09
Message-Id: 1089389500.11041.64.camel@localhost
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] x86 2004.2 Profile by Grant Goodyear
1 On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 11:37, Grant Goodyear wrote:
2 > Chris Gianelloni wrote: [Fri Jul 09 2004, 10:42:59AM EDT]
3 > > For consitency's sake, yes, it is necessary. I don't want to build a
4 > > machine today using the 2004.0 profile and build a machine tomorrow
5 > > using *the same profile* and have one using xfree and one using
6 > > xorg-x11.
7 >
8 > Just to make sure I understand, you're suggesting a new profile that
9 > removes the absolutely pointless xfree line in the packages file
10 > (pointless because it's not a system file and we haven't had any xfree
11 > ebuilds in portage that fail to satisfy the requirement since probably
12 > the 1.2 days) and change the default x11 virtual to point to xorg-x11?
13
14 Yes, the removal of the xfree line from packages would be done. I would
15 also change the default virtual for x11, opengl, glu, and xft.
16
17 > It's not really clear to me that a new profile needs to be created every
18 > time a default virtual changes. My reasoning is that any user who
19 > already has something installed that satisfies that virtual will see
20 > absolutely no difference with the new profile. With X, that would be the
21 > vast majority of our users, who then might well be more confused
22 > that using the new profile does _not_ cause them to upgrade to xorg-x11.
23
24 I understand that users that switch profiles will see no difference, and
25 am fine with that. I'm not worried about people that do that, since we
26 will in essence not be affecting them at all. Since the switch from
27 xfree to xorg-x11 has the potential to be so wide-spread, I think it
28 should be done with the creation of a new profile.
29
30 The idea of changing a virtual mid-release has *always* bothered me and
31 is a prime example of Gentoo's problems when it comes to enterprise
32 users. In an enterprise environment, consistency between releases is
33 expected. I should *never* have to wonder which X server got installed
34 between on each machine between multiple 2004.2 installations. I should
35 *know* that 2004.0 and 2004.1 used XFree86 and that 2004.2+ uses X.org's
36 server.
37
38 I have no problem dealing with the users that switch their profiles
39 themselves and then wonder why they didn't switch X servers rather than
40 dealing with the inconsistency between installs.
41
42 If GCC 3.4 were ready for wide-spread usage, I would recommend changing
43 it in the packages file, also. Unfortunately, it is not at that point
44 yet, so we are not making such a change.
45
46 --
47 Chris Gianelloni
48 Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
49 Gentoo Linux
50
51 Is your power animal a penguin?

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] x86 2004.2 Profile John Davis <zhen@g.o>