| 1 |
On Thursday, 8 June 2006 5:15, Olivier Crete wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 2006-07-06 at 18:41 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Arek (James Potts) wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 5 |
> > >>> >=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for |
| 6 |
> > >>> |
| 7 |
> > >>> modular X. |
| 8 |
> > >> |
| 9 |
> > >> I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow |
| 10 |
> > >> unported ebuilds to break. |
| 11 |
> > > |
| 12 |
> > > Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a great idea to fix the unported |
| 13 |
> > > ebuilds. Would it be possible to mark virtual/x11-7 as deprecated |
| 14 |
> > > (using enotice/ewarn or similar), in order to get people to port any |
| 15 |
> > > build relying on it to modular X? |
| 16 |
> > > |
| 17 |
> > > The way I see it, once virtual/x11-7 has been deprecated for a while (6 |
| 18 |
> > > months to a year) and most popular packages have been ported to modular |
| 19 |
> > > X, virtual/x11-7 and any packages still relying on it could be given |
| 20 |
> > > Last Rites. |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> > Hmm, I don't think so... There's been a plenty of time to do this when |
| 23 |
> > modular X has been package.masked, the remaining unported stuff didn't |
| 24 |
> > get much further even after it's been unmasked. There's been a |
| 25 |
> > (debatable) repoman check, which has been too annoying so devs nuked it |
| 26 |
> > for themselves, now it's non-fatal warning again (which is mostly being |
| 27 |
> > ignored). |
| 28 |
> > |
| 29 |
> > Soooo - I'd pretty much say until the real breakage is *visible* and |
| 30 |
> > users start to scream - not much will change. Making it visible could |
| 31 |
> > also help us differentiate between used and used stuff. If there's |
| 32 |
> > something unported and you get no bug, then probably noone uses the |
| 33 |
> > thing, nothing depends on it and it can be punted from the tree. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a |
| 36 |
> last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask |
| 37 |
> the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
games-roguelike/slashem is one package that I know of. It should have very |
| 40 |
similar dependencies to nethack. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
Raymond Lewis Rebbeck |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives