| 1 |
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 10:17:28 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > Gentoo devs don't mark software as stable, they mark ebuilds as |
| 4 |
> > stable. This has no direct link to the usability of the software |
| 5 |
> > itself. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Nuh uh. From http://devmanual.gentoo.org/keywording/index.html, |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> arch (x86, ppc-macos) |
| 12 |
> Both the package version and the ebuild are widely tested, known to |
| 13 |
> work and not have any serious issues on the indicated platform. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Yeah, I put that badly. The important point here is "and the ebuild". |
| 16 |
The software could be as reliable as hell, but that does not mean the |
| 17 |
ebuild has been sufficiently tested. arch means package and ebuild are |
| 18 |
well tested, but that doesn't imply that ~arch means both are untested. |
| 19 |
That's why software marked as stable by upstream doesn't always have an |
| 20 |
~arch keyword. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
You've cut the context of my reply, but it was |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> > No! It is not the latest. It's just what portage is offering you. The |
| 25 |
> > link I sent you clearly (!?) stated that you need to be running the |
| 26 |
> > latest 'Certified' driver revision 275.09.07 to get this fix. Just |
| 27 |
> > because the Gentoo devs haven't marked it as stable does (to me) mean |
| 28 |
> > that I should take their word for it. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
If Nvidia say to use the later version because they know the current |
| 31 |
arch version is broken, you should follow their advice and not ignore it |
| 32 |
simply because of a keyword setting in the ebuild. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
A printer consists of three main parts: the case, the jammed paper tray |
| 39 |
and the blinking red light. |
Archives