Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Unmasking modular X
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:44:11
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Unmasking modular X by Mark Loeser
1 Mark Loeser wrote:
2 > Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o> said:
3 >> Is there any need for the packages to go into stable without the X deps being
4 >> fixed? Why not just open a bug for the package maintainer and mark it against
5 >> whatever bug is requesting stabling of that package? Moving something to
6 >> stable that you know is going to be broken within a relatively short
7 >> timeframe seems like a very bad idea...
8 >
9 > We are talking about completely unrelated versions, not what we are touching.
10 > For example, old imagemagick ebuilds sitting around, where the newer ebuilds
11 > are fixed, but old ones are not. We have a security bug open about this
12 > package right now, and having an error about deps in some old version doesn't
13 > really help arch teams at all.
15 Oh, so we just screw up people using modular X on a stable system by
16 breaking the latest stable ebuild..
18 Thanks,
19 Donnie


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Unmasking modular X Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o>