1 |
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Grobian wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> I was/am one of the people to have the misconception that ~arch means |
4 |
> the ebuild is fine (why else do I test it for in any possible situation) |
5 |
> but the software may be buggy. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> The only difference between ~arch and arch is that the ebuild might |
8 |
> suck! |
9 |
|
10 |
I agree. Maybe you could add that ~arch means "ebuild is fine for at least |
11 |
one combination of USE flags for at least one profile"? |
12 |
|
13 |
What's more, an ebuild that doesn't suck in only one profile can still go |
14 |
stable if it gets package.masked in the others. (Comments in package.mask |
15 |
indicate that this is current practice.) |
16 |
|
17 |
> Now it suddenly makes sense that such ebuild is being stabled after 30 |
18 |
> days, because the assumption is there that the software being installed |
19 |
> itself is stable, as upstream called it stable. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Now I don't think this particular quote should be taken as 'the law', |
22 |
> but it nicely shows that even on the base of Gentoo, the correct |
23 |
> interpretation for ~arch and arch is not really known. |
24 |
|
25 |
Nathan said, "-arch :: the end-user software is/might be flakey", but this |
26 |
doesn't say anything about the ebuild. |
27 |
|
28 |
I'd like to know where the package maintainer comes into it. If the |
29 |
package maintainers are keeping on top of the porting going on upstream, |
30 |
they will know when an OS X bug is fixed. If they are assigned the bug, |
31 |
and they release the fix, do they change the keyword from -arch to ~arch? |
32 |
|
33 |
nano is a good example. It was masked in default-darwin/package.mask, but |
34 |
could have been a -arch keyword. Once upstream fixed the bug, the bugzilla |
35 |
entries fell to the macos devs because the profile was masking the fix. If |
36 |
the package maintainer had marked the fix ~arch, users could have emerged |
37 |
it without sending new bug reports... |
38 |
|
39 |
-f |
40 |
-- |
41 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |