| 1 |
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 09:17, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 09:03:17PM +0100 or thereabouts, Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Could you explain why you think that architecture specific stable keywords are |
| 4 |
> > necessary? Would that not create a too big strain on the arch developers. If |
| 5 |
> > a package is stable on an arch shouldn't it also be automatically a candidate |
| 6 |
> > for the stable tree? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Well, let's take BerkDB as an example. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Currently, db-4.1.25_p1-r3 has the following keywords: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> KEYWORDS="ia64 ~x86 ppc ~alpha amd64 ~sparc ~mips ppc64 hppa" |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Then, db-4.0.14-r2.ebuild has: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> KEYWORDS="x86 ~ppc sparc alpha mips hppa ~arm amd64 ia64" |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> So which one would be marked stable? The first is ~x86 but ppc, the second is |
| 19 |
> ~ppc but x86. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Also, what happens with ~x86 ebuilds that are marked stable on other arches |
| 22 |
> (such as db-4.1.25) Should AMD64, Itanium, PPC and HPPA users all be |
| 23 |
> forced to use an older version of db? Or do we force x86 users to use a |
| 24 |
> version of db that is currently ~masked? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
This would be easy. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
db-4.1.25_p1-r3 KEYWORDS="ia64 ppc amd64 ppc64 hppa" |
| 29 |
db-4.0.14-r2 KEYWORDS="x86 sparc alpha mips" |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Now, depending on which arch you'r eon would entirely depend on which |
| 32 |
version you get. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
There should be ZERO updates in the actual stable tree. You should be |
| 35 |
able to install a machine on day 1 of the release, or day 89 and still |
| 36 |
get the EXACT same tree, otherwise, it isn't stable. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Updates would have to be provided separately, though still via rsync. I |
| 39 |
would see something like /usr/portage-stable and /usr/portage-updates, |
| 40 |
with -stable being static with the release used and -updates being all |
| 41 |
the changes since release. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
It would also make "upgrading" to a new release fairly easy, as a change |
| 44 |
in /etc/make.conf from VERSION="2004.0" to VERSION="2004.1" would yield |
| 45 |
the -stable being upgraded to the new release and -updates being |
| 46 |
propagated with the updates. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 50 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 51 |
Games Team |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Is your power animal a pengiun? |
Archives