Gentoo Archives: gentoo-releng

From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@×××××××.net>
To: gentoo-releng@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-releng] Re: Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:27:13
Message-Id: 47A60778.6070001@cesmail.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-releng] Re: Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta by Alex Howells
1 Alex Howells wrote:
2 > On 03/02/2008, Markus Hauschild <hauschild.markus@××××××××××.com> wrote:
3 >> If you really want to test ~arch packets you don't necessarily need
4 >> ~arch stages to download, you can just switch your Installation to
5 >> ~arch and then file bugs etc.
6 >
7 > .. which may not be received too well. There is a perception that
8 > Developers *support* ~arch, which is a skewed outlook; it's there for
9 > testing, it is *not* meant to be used by 99.5% of end users. It is a
10 > means to an end, a way to track packages which *may* be stable, a QA
11 > process.
12 >
13 > ie: The following would/should be entirely acceptable:
14 >
15 > <User> I'm running ~arch of libfoo and it's breaking appwoo, help!
16 > Need this to work, really *REALLY* badly!
17 >
18 > <Dev> We're aware of those issues, but libfoo works fine for most
19 > of the other apps which require it. No ETA on the fix,
20 > tough sh*t for running ~arch on a critical box.
21 >
22 > <User> Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!
23 >
24 > If you're interested in helping that QA process, most of the
25 > architecture teams now have an 'Arch Tester' (AT) setup you could help
26 > out with...
27
28 Well ... I've been running ~x86 and ~amd64 for a long time and I can't
29 remember an instance where I needed to drop back to stable for the
30 things I regularly use, such as R, maxima, Ruby, Lyx, and I can't
31 remember a time when I needed to drop back to stable for a core
32 component like the kernel, gcc, perl, or python either. But -- that's
33 x86 and amd64 -- it might be much riskier on something less common, like
34 powerpc.
35
36 --
37 gentoo-releng@l.g.o mailing list

Replies