Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:46:12
Message-Id: 20140115004606.GA3526@laptop.home
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy by Tom Wijsman
1 On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 01:38:08AM +0100, Tom Wijsman wrote:
2 > On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:06:07 +0100
3 > "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote:
4 >
5 > > Am Mittwoch, 15. Januar 2014, 00:49:28 schrieb Tom Wijsman:
6 > > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:37:19 -0600
7 > > >
8 > > > William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
9 > > > > Thoughts?
10 > > >
11 > > > In this situation, I see three opposite ends of choices:
12 > > >
13 > >
14 > > Here's another idea:
15 > >
16 > > 4. Friendly ask the arch teams / make a policy that @system packages
17 > > come first.
18 >
19 > Hmm, I'm wondering if that has an actual use or whether that would just
20 > move the problem. The bug in question that WilliamH demonstrated is
21 > indeed part of @system; but shouldn't be, it is due to functions.sh.
22
23 Correct; Openrc ultimately will not be part of @system; it is provided
24 by a virtual that is.
25
26 If you want to say @system, you have to include all rdepends of virtuals
27 in @system and all packages that are dependencies of any packages in
28 @system, at least.
29
30 Keeping track of that will be difficult at best.
31
32 William

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Tom Wijsman <TomWij@g.o>