| 1 |
On 09/13/2010 10:13 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday 13 September 2010 21:00:42 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 09/13/2010 09:45 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: |
| 4 |
>>>> [...] |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>> I wouldn't expect people to run a Gentoo system with all packages on |
| 7 |
>>> unstable. I tend to only select specific packages as unstable when I |
| 8 |
>>> really need that version. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Usually the best "stability" is reached by running either full stable or |
| 11 |
>> full testing (aka "unstable"). Mixing usually makes things worse. I |
| 12 |
>> used to run a mixed system, but at some point it was clear to me that |
| 13 |
>> this fscks things up quite often due to package versions whether ~arch |
| 14 |
>> packages breaking with arch ones. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> This is true, but not all packages I want are in stable, this forces me to |
| 17 |
> unmask these. |
| 18 |
> I also don't always want to wait for packages to become stable. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> What I currently have in "/etc/portage/package.keywords is: |
| 21 |
> =games-strategy/x2-1.4.05 ~amd64 |
| 22 |
> =games-strategy/x3-2.5.01 ~amd64 |
| 23 |
> =app-emulation/virtualbox-bin-3.2.8 ~amd64 |
| 24 |
> =app-emulation/virtualbox-modules-3.2.8 ~amd64 |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> These don't have a large set of additional requirements. If they did, I |
| 27 |
> wouldn't have upgraded to these. I also had "qt-creator" in there, but that |
| 28 |
> one has become stable since. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> I'm still not clear how versions can be made to be marked "stable". |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
After they go into testing and stay there for a month or two, someone |
| 33 |
makes a request to put it into stable. AFAIK, this request can also be |
| 34 |
automated. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
The person putting it into stable is then required to sanity check the |
| 37 |
package whether it can work with the rest of stable packages, since they |
| 38 |
differ from the testing ones. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
And that step is what makes a fully ~arch system more reliable then a |
| 41 |
mixed one; because the package is known to work in an ~arch system, but |
| 42 |
it's not known whether it works OK in a stable one. It's also a reason |
| 43 |
why many devs don't accept bug reports if you're using an ~arch package |
| 44 |
in a stable system; it's just too random and problems are expected. |
| 45 |
With Gentoo, a stable system is supposed to work (obviously). An ~arch |
| 46 |
system is also supposed to work (note that "testing" doesn't mean |
| 47 |
"broken"; I try to avoid the term "unstable" when I refer to ~arch, |
| 48 |
"testing" is the term that accurately describes what ~arch is.) But a |
| 49 |
mixed system is not supposed to work ("not supposed" meaning no one is |
| 50 |
trying to make it work or even testing it.) |
Archives