Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jochen Maes <gentoo-dev@××××.be>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] OT noise (Was: Profile masking and profiles package.mask)
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 23:38:01
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] OT noise (Was: Profile masking and profiles package.mask) by Danny van Dyk
Danny van Dyk wrote:
> Am Samstag, 30. September 2006 19:02 schrieb Jakub Moc: > >> Mike Frysinger wrote: >> >>> seriously jakub, stop responding ... you have nothing technical to >>> offer to the issue at hand >>> >>> let the people who work on portage handle it >>> -mike >>> >> Eh, the whole technical point here is that paludis behaviour differs >> from portage (and differs from pkgcore, FWIW). >> > This has little to do with why this change to the devmanual has been > done. > > >> So, hiding the inconsistency via altering the profiles doesn't change >> anything. Plus, the point of the bug's flame fest was that bugzilla >> is not a proper place to request such behaviour changes, and >> definitely not a reason for QA to mess with the profiles. Sticking >> the stuff in package.mask won't make the inconsistent behaviour >> vanish in any way, it will just hide it. >> > It is not a behaviour change imho. The "packages" file changed > its meaning subtly after introducing cascading profiles. > As ciaranm already pointed out: It is not meant to mask "<"-like > versions anymore. It's meant to > - Describe the system package set > - Define which versions are _at least_ needed for a profile. > > >> So, I'd kinda appreciate if concerned folks (including portage and >> relevant affected arches) were involved in this discussion, instead >> of sneaking the changes in under QA disguise. >> > Release engineering arch coordinators, which happen to be the people who > maintain the profiles below default-linux/ for their relevant arches, > have been CCed and Chris already stated that he forgot/didn't realize > to fix this problem for no-nptl/2.4's package.mask. > > Jakub: Please reevaluate the behaviour you showed on both the bug and > this mailing list. I for one don't consider it anywhere near > appropriate. This shall be no offense, just a comment in regard that > you can do better. >
mike, danny, thanks for trying, but past reference showed that he likes to talk like a chicken who's head has been chopped of. This whole discussion made most of the people forget what it was about... good on ya jakub...
> Danny >
-- gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list