| 1 |
It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break |
| 2 |
sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
These are fairly significant science packages for which there are no current |
| 5 |
(qt4) or "equivalent" packages. While on one hand it may not do much harm |
| 6 |
to mask Qt3 based games packages (which I believe has already been done), it |
| 7 |
is entirely another thing when one goes masking significant science packages |
| 8 |
for which there may be no substitutes (e.g. qcad and xdrawchem). |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
So, an end user (e.g. a Gentoo user who is not a Gentoo developer) is forced |
| 11 |
to ask: |
| 12 |
a) Has research been done to determine whether there are replacements for |
| 13 |
these packages and why aren't they suggested in the mask comments? |
| 14 |
b) If one is forced to run Qt3 in order to support these older packages, is |
| 15 |
there *good* documentation on how to do this (and why isn't this suggested |
| 16 |
in the mask comments)? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
While I am in general in favor of migrating to the most recent packages, |
| 19 |
there are cases where packages will still work reliably well with older |
| 20 |
libraries (and would likely work forever if there were "static" build |
| 21 |
options). So before there is a rush to remove ebuilds it should be asked |
| 22 |
whether it is possible to produce a static build and/or whether there is a |
| 23 |
clear path provided for the retention of "legacy" packages? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Thank you, |
| 26 |
Robert Bradbury |
Archives