Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Michael 'veremitz' Everitt <gentoo@×××××××.xyz>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Keywordreqs and slacking arch teams
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2020 00:19:54
Message-Id: bd2ddcd9-905a-12e7-b6d6-135aa2a4614f@veremit.xyz
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Keywordreqs and slacking arch teams by Rolf Eike Beer
On 02/01/20 23:35, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> Am Freitag, 3. Januar 2020, 00:25:06 CET schrieb Mike Pagano: >> On Thursday, January 2, 2020 3:32:12 PM EST Rolf Eike Beer wrote: >>>> - Allowed a simple "Add keyword(s) <y..> for package <x>" interface, >>>> >>>> that intelligently created an issue and a target list, and then once >>>> the list was built, constantly ensured the list to be valid, or >>>> determined automatically when sub-work was completed and reducing the >>>> published list automatically, and then responded to potential issues >>>> based on changes in git, ( as opposed to being only triggered when >>>> the bug was touched ) >>> As someone who does both keywordings and stabilizations regularly on hppa >>> and sparc I think I must share a bit of my experiences: >> <snip> >> >> hppa is making us keep old kernels around [1]. Should the kernel team be >> doing more to get your attention then CC'ing hppa on all of the kernel >> STABLEREQ bugs [2]? > I only run vanilla-sources since there are still lot of cache corruption > problems in hppa kernels, or whatever makes them flaky. > > Linux pioneer 5.4.6-parisc64 #1 SMP Fri Dec 27 10:23:09 CET 2019 parisc64 > PA8800 (Mako) 9000/785/C8000 GNU/Linux > Linux voyager 5.4.6-parisc #1 Fri Dec 27 15:46:43 CET 2019 parisc PA8600 (PCX- > W+) 9000/785/C3600 GNU/Linux > > So _I_ personally would say just drop old kernels, but that is in no way > authorative. > > Eike
Is it viable at all to test gentoo-sources or would it be better simply to unkeyword?

Attachments

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