Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:01:09
Message-Id: 43D7C813.3000409@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X by Jason Stubbs
1 Jason Stubbs wrote:
2 > I've implemented and tested the check locally but haven't committed it yet.
3 > Repoman isn't really structured to allow for tests against a set of ebuilds
4 > so the checks are done on every version. There is also definitely one false
5 > positive (virtual/x11-6.8) so, for this and the fact that every version is
6 > tested, it would probably better to just make it a warning. Thoughts?
7
8 I'd rather see the xorg-x11 check removed and make this a repoman
9 failure than keep it a warning. Would it be possible to factor it up a
10 little bit so that virtual/x11 is a failure and xorg-x11 is a warning?
11
12 It doesn't bother me that checks are done on every version, but what it
13 does mean is that the next committer will need to port any modular X
14 changes to all the ebuilds, since we've generally just been putting them
15 in the latest ~arch and newer (p.mask). This should mostly be a copy and
16 paste issue, but it will be a minor annoyance even though it's the best
17 thing we could do, IMHO.
18
19 Thanks,
20 Donnie

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Unmasking modular X Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>