| 1 |
> Oh, you just want to test the features *you* use, understood. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Guys, |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I did not want to start a flamewar. I've been running ~arch for years |
| 6 |
and I've had my fair share of breakage, which I'm perfectly fine with |
| 7 |
(e.g. I'm not complaining that dev-lang/php-5.4.0._rc2 currently fails |
| 8 |
to compile with USE=+snmp). It's my choice to run unstable, and I only |
| 9 |
do so on machines where a hosed system is a nuisance rather than an |
| 10 |
emergency. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I write software for a living, so I know perfectly well that covering |
| 13 |
every possible configuration in your tests is extremely difficult, |
| 14 |
especially if you're not granted ample resources (i.e. time+$$$) |
| 15 |
specifically for that purpose. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I was just a little surprised that a system package turned out to be |
| 18 |
completely broken in a scenario that I thought was quite widespread, |
| 19 |
especially among the devs (as rc_parallel results in _very_ tangible |
| 20 |
time savings, especially on a desktop with lots of services and frequent |
| 21 |
boots). |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Things were handled well: as soon as the issue was reported, the |
| 24 |
breakage was acknowledged and the offending version was masked and then |
| 25 |
removed. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That's all as far as I'm concerned. No data was lost and no kittens were |
| 28 |
killed. Let's move on. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
andrea |
Archives