| 1 |
Saturday 19 Sep 2015 09:55:14, Anthony G. Basile wrote : |
| 2 |
> On 9/19/15 8:56 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Sent from an iPhone, sorry for the HTML... |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > On Sep 19, 2015, at 8:31 AM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov <mva@×××.name> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >>> So, if an arch developer tests the package(s) on one architecture, he is |
| 8 |
> >>> allowed to stabilize/keyword for all. |
| 9 |
> >> And how about the |
| 10 |
> >>> some arches rquires additional tests during stabilization, like so: mips*, |
| 11 |
> >> arm*, and some more exotic ones |
| 12 |
> >> definition in developer manuals? :) |
| 13 |
> >> |
| 14 |
> >> -- |
| 15 |
> >> Best regards, |
| 16 |
> >> mva |
| 17 |
> > The ALLARCHES keyword is meant for stuff that is essentially platform-agnostic. Python code shouldn't act any different on arm than arm64 than amd64. Using that keyword on something like ffmpeg would be a bad use of the keyword. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Even with python where, for example, `import ctypes' might trigger |
| 20 |
> something on one arch and not another. Anyhow, thanks for the reminder |
| 21 |
> ago. I see that keyword as "risky" but an unfortunate risk we have to |
| 22 |
> take because we are short of manpower and don't have automated arch |
| 23 |
> testing. I say use it where it appears reasonable (eg interpreted |
| 24 |
> script and not compiled code) but be ready that every once in a while |
| 25 |
> we'll get bitten. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> -- |
| 28 |
> Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 29 |
> Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 30 |
> E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 31 |
> GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 32 |
> GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
We've been using this keyword fairly often (we = Gentoo Java team) whenever |
| 37 |
possible since the announcement and it worked out pretty well so far. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Patrice Clement |
| 41 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 42 |
http://www.gentoo.org |
Archives