Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Moving GCC-3.4 to stable on x86
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:52:37
Message-Id: 1133441228.22022.4.camel@vertigo.twi-31o2.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Moving GCC-3.4 to stable on x86 by R Hill
1 On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 23:17 -0600, R Hill wrote:
2 > > That makes me feel a bit more comfortable. I still think that something
3 > > more then an einfo warning should be provided, as its easy to overlook
4 > > those.
5 >
6 > All arches other than x86 have made the switch to 3.4 stable already. They did
7 > so without problem and without extra docs. Why does x86, the last to switch,
8 > need to be special-cased?
9
10 Honestly, it is because x86 is the *vast* majority of our user base.
11 When we change something there, we get an onslaught of
12 complaints/comments/opinions. The truth is that while we have a large
13 "silent majority" of people that know what we're doing, we also have the
14 very "vocal minority" of people that only managed to get Gentoo working
15 because they followed some guide to the letter. These people freak out
16 at patch-level bumps that require fix_libtool_files.sh, so I can only
17 imagine how confusing something like that would be to them. Yes, the
18 other arches have done this. In the case of at least one, they aligned
19 it with a new profile/release, to ease the pain. They also were very
20 sure to announce it beforehand. Seeing as how I have been on the
21 receiving end of this border-line harassment for making a change that
22 doesn't hurt anything, I don't want anyone on my team to make the same
23 mistake.
24
25 --
26 Chris Gianelloni
27 Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
28 x86 Architecture Team
29 Games - Developer
30 Gentoo Linux

Attachments

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