| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, foser wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 19:01 +0000, Ferris McCormick wrote: |
| 7 |
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 8 |
> > Hash: SHA1 |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, foser wrote: |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > > > > |
| 13 |
> > > > 1. In one instance, if I, as sparc, mark something as KEYWORDS=sparc, it |
| 14 |
> > > > means essentially one thing: In my best judgment this package is |
| 15 |
> > > > stable for use on sparc. It doesn't say anything about other |
| 16 |
> > > > architectures (except as evidence of goodness). |
| 17 |
> > > |
| 18 |
> > > You are not the package maintainer, you should not mark it stable before |
| 19 |
> > > that happens. So your arch going stable has no wider significance. |
| 20 |
> > > |
| 21 |
> > Sure it does, unless the maintainer never makes mistakes. It's more |
| 22 |
> > evidence that the package is good (consider the endian problems which |
| 23 |
> > come up now and then. If maintainer is little-endian and sparc goes |
| 24 |
> > stable, that suggests to other big-endian archs that there is probably |
| 25 |
> > not an endian concern. Look at games, sys-cluster, and I think you'll |
| 26 |
> > find examples where number of stable architectures matters.) |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Well, it only proves it is _more_ stable, but the significance of the |
| 29 |
> 'maintainer arch' is that it is considered a general bugfree ebuild as |
| 30 |
> far as known bugs is concerned. Arch specific issues are for the arch |
| 31 |
> maintainers. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
That's my point. To me, _more_ stable is significant. We are not in an |
| 35 |
ideal world; consider how you yourself compare the following two cases |
| 36 |
(assuming a sparc-ish outlook, x86 home), and would an unsuccessful test |
| 37 |
surprise you more in one case than the other?: |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
KEYWORDS="x86 ~sparc ~a ~b ~c ~d ~e -f" |
| 40 |
KEYWORDS="x86 ~sparc a b c ~d e" |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
That's all I am saying; don't try to make it more profound than |
| 43 |
intended. :) |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Sorry, I couldn't resist |
| 46 |
Ferris |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
- -- |
| 49 |
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@g.o> |
| 50 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux (sparc) |
| 51 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 52 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
iD8DBQFA2gQ8Qa6M3+I///cRAh5rAKDgQuVpfM3kc+Lb+4oexTRVtz1XoQCdFuY4 |
| 55 |
4FJwrxdGh/yhqdzycIrI9SM= |
| 56 |
=M7vr |
| 57 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
-- |
| 60 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives