| 1 |
Arek (James Potts) wrote: |
| 2 |
> Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> >=virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for |
| 4 |
>>> modular X. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
>> I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow |
| 7 |
>> unported ebuilds to break. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a great idea to fix the unported |
| 10 |
> ebuilds. Would it be possible to mark virtual/x11-7 as deprecated |
| 11 |
> (using enotice/ewarn or similar), in order to get people to port any |
| 12 |
> build relying on it to modular X? |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> The way I see it, once virtual/x11-7 has been deprecated for a while (6 |
| 15 |
> months to a year) and most popular packages have been ported to modular |
| 16 |
> X, virtual/x11-7 and any packages still relying on it could be given |
| 17 |
> Last Rites. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Hmm, I don't think so... There's been a plenty of time to do this when |
| 20 |
modular X has been package.masked, the remaining unported stuff didn't |
| 21 |
get much further even after it's been unmasked. There's been a |
| 22 |
(debatable) repoman check, which has been too annoying so devs nuked it |
| 23 |
for themselves, now it's non-fatal warning again (which is mostly being |
| 24 |
ignored). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Soooo - I'd pretty much say until the real breakage is *visible* and |
| 27 |
users start to scream - not much will change. Making it visible could |
| 28 |
also help us differentiate between used and used stuff. If there's |
| 29 |
something unported and you get no bug, then probably noone uses the |
| 30 |
thing, nothing depends on it and it can be punted from the tree. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
On a side note, this virtual also hides potential bugs in ebuilds that |
| 33 |
already have been ported, you can miss dependencies there if you have |
| 34 |
already them emerged b/c of the virtual. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Best regards, |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Jakub Moc |
| 42 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 43 |
GPG signature: |
| 44 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 45 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives