| 1 |
On 01/27/2013 03:26 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 2 |
> El dom, 27-01-2013 a las 00:26 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel escribió: |
| 3 |
>> Just to keep everyone updated, ... |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>> FYI, the new 13.0 profiles are now all available in profiles.desc, for now |
| 6 |
>>> all with status "dev" (i.e. repoman includes them only when you request |
| 7 |
>>> developer profile checking). |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> This means the procedure below is complete up to and including point 5) |
| 10 |
>>> now. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>>> Please consider changing your profile symlink manually and testing the new |
| 13 |
>>> profile tree. In case of problems, please file a bug and assign it to me |
| 14 |
>>> (or tell me if I'm around). |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> If all goes well, we'll continue in a week. |
| 17 |
>>> |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> A small bug in repoman turned up when testing the EAPI=5 profiles, and |
| 20 |
>> therefore we will wait for the next stable portage version before the 10.0 |
| 21 |
>> profiles are deprecated. So, another 3-4 weeks to go maybe. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> [The only alternative would be to require all devs to run at least ~arch |
| 24 |
>> portage, since the bug only affects repoman, not emerge.] |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> Cheers, |
| 27 |
>> Andreas |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Maybe other option would be to have a portage version like current |
| 31 |
> stable + repoman fix and fast stabilize as soon as possible |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I think the latest portage release (2.1.11.50) should be fine. It has |
| 34 |
lots of other fixes that will be nice to have in stable. I plan to file |
| 35 |
a stable request in about 1.5 weeks. |
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Thanks, |
| 38 |
Zac |
Archives