1 |
On Tuesday 25 August 2009 23:04:12 Grant Edwards wrote: |
2 |
> Last week on all my systems emerge upgraded firefox (3.5.2-r1) |
3 |
> and xul-runner (1.9.1.2-r2). |
4 |
> |
5 |
> Now it's decided it wants to downgrade all of them to 3.0.13 |
6 |
> and 1.9.0.13. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Looking at the package database page, I see that firefox |
9 |
> 3.5.2-r1 is marked as unstable (~x86). Same for xulrunner |
10 |
> 1.3.1.2-r1. That explains why emerge wants to downgrade to the |
11 |
> stable version: I don't have ~x86 unmasked for |
12 |
> firefox/xulrunner and never have had. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> What I don't understand is why they got upgraded last week. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Were firefox 3.5.2 and xulrunner 1.9.1.2 marked as stable last |
17 |
> week and then changed back to unstable this week? |
18 |
|
19 |
IIRC someone posted in the last few days that firefox and xulrunner were |
20 |
briefly stable for a few hours. |
21 |
|
22 |
fwiw, firefox-3.0.13 and xulrunner-1.9.0.13 are ~arch here, I synced two |
23 |
hours ago and my mirror is 8-12 hours behind the master. |
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |