| 1 |
Paul, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
That cleared it up for me, thanks |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Jeff. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
On 04/05/06, Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Actually the testing keywords are not for unstable packages. If something |
| 12 |
> is unstable it must be masked. If we however want to test our packaging |
| 13 |
> we put it in ~arch. If something is in ~arch that means that it works for |
| 14 |
> the packager, but that your mileage may vary. ~arch may sometimes have |
| 15 |
> unexpected problems, especially involving migration from old versions to |
| 16 |
> new versions. Actually most time is spent on ~arch, as there is where |
| 17 |
> development happens. As a package is seen to be stable, then it gets |
| 18 |
> promoted to arch. This is just a change of the keyword. The developer |
| 19 |
> then goes on to newer versions of the package. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Paul |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> -- |
| 24 |
> Paul de Vrieze |
| 25 |
> Gentoo Developer |
| 26 |
> Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 27 |
> Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
------------------------------------------------------ |
| 35 |
Argument against Linux number 6,033: |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus |
| 38 |
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work |
| 39 |
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble." |
Archives