| 1 |
On 5/5/07, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss03@××××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Yeah, a new numbered release deserves it's own ebuild, even if it has to |
| 3 |
> linger in package.mask. Make sure it's been 2-3 days after the release |
| 4 |
> and then file a version bump bug. Please report if "simply renaming" the |
| 5 |
> existing ebuild works and/or what you had to change to get a clean |
| 6 |
> compile/install. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Simple renaming worked on my "~x86" system. I haven't noticed nothing |
| 9 |
suspicious so far. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> If you follow Wesnoth closely, but aren't part of upstream, you might |
| 12 |
> consider becoming a/the gentoo package maintainer for it. IIRC, IMHO, the |
| 13 |
> packaging for Wesnoth could use a little "love". |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I agree that Wesnoth woul need more "love", but I don't qualify as |
| 16 |
official maintainer of Wesnoth package simply because I have never |
| 17 |
looked into the code. But if "let's try to rename ebuild and see what |
| 18 |
happens when the new version is released", I'll be glad to help by |
| 19 |
sending reports to this list. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Thanks, |
| 22 |
Marko |
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives