| 1 |
On Friday 02 July 2004 4:29 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> A "tested profile" would also have to include specific versions, |
| 3 |
> otherwise there is no way that a person could properly certify the |
| 4 |
> validity of the test. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I agree. The profiles only list ~70 packages and those versions aren't |
| 7 |
pinned. Although maybe they should be. The difference between the |
| 8 |
versions in a tested configuration/profile and what ends up getting |
| 9 |
installed later should include security updates (backported security |
| 10 |
fixes) -- which is not something we do right now... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
My point is that I believe we could address this (at least in part) by |
| 13 |
pinning versions in profiles, and having repoman block commits that |
| 14 |
attempt to remove ebuilds that are required by a profile. It's not a new |
| 15 |
idea. This, instead of branching CVS. Although I'm not opposed to that |
| 16 |
idea either, but IIRC some devs are... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Cheers, |
| 19 |
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@g.o] |
| 20 |
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives