| 1 |
On Saturday 27 May 2006 19:58, Alexander Skwar wrote: |
| 2 |
> Richard Fish wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 5/27/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@×××××××××××××××.name> wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> gcc update "Nothing needs to be done".... Sure... How much did the |
| 5 |
> >> person who wrote this check? "Hello World!" worked, and that's it? |
| 6 |
> >> |
| 7 |
> >> Sometimes this complete lack of QA is really pissing me off :( |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Stop using ~arch packages, or stop whining. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> No, I won't do neither. The GWN and the upgrade doc used to say, |
| 12 |
> that an upgrade is (basically) riskless. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
no it does not. |
| 17 |
You are talking bullshit. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
GWN: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
The number of applications that do not compile with gcc-4.1 is extremely small |
| 22 |
now, and most users should not experience any problems with ~arch packages |
| 23 |
not compiling. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Read it, understand it. It is hard, I know. But it does not say 'riskless'. |
| 26 |
Not even 'basically riskless'. Read again. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
And the uzpgrade guide says: |
| 29 |
Generally speaking, upgrades to bug fix releases, like from 3.3.5 to 3.3.6, |
| 30 |
should be quite safe -- just emerge new version, switch your system to use it |
| 31 |
and rebuild the only affected package, libtool. However, some GCC upgrades |
| 32 |
break binary compatibility; in such cases a rebuild of the affected packages |
| 33 |
(or even whole toolchain and system) might be required. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> > ~arch works most of the |
| 38 |
> > time, but it is a _testing_ branch. Do you expect the devs to login |
| 39 |
> > to each and every Gentoo user's system to test a new package and |
| 40 |
> > ensure complete functionality before adding it to ~arch? |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> Bullshit. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> I'd expect them to do testing and not give so bold statements |
| 45 |
> as "The upgrade should be incredibly easy and require no additional |
| 46 |
> work to install and use. " without making VERY sure, that this |
| 47 |
> is actually true. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
and ~arch is the testing ground. Basic testing 'it works or it works not' are |
| 51 |
the hard-masked packages. |
| 52 |
Maybe you should calm down? |
| 53 |
Or do you want to stay in your sulk-mode and act like a prima donna? |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
> And what's also irritating are so many small errors, like files |
| 57 |
> with non-matching filesizes/checksums in the digests. |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
> > I just upgraded to gcc-4.1 and pruned 3.4.6, and KDE, koffice, OOo, |
| 60 |
> > and mozilla all still load and run fine. |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> Did you yet re-compile Qt 3 and Qt 4? No? |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> Then you're experiences just don't count. KDE broke on my |
| 65 |
> system, when I recompiled Qt. Before the recompile, KDE was fine. |
| 66 |
> As I've wrote in lengths on the bug report. Seems you've not read |
| 67 |
> it - why not? Why am I writing reports and *also* post links |
| 68 |
> here? |
| 69 |
> |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
oh, that is sooo surprising. Most of the times, a qt-update requires |
| 72 |
recompiling kdelibs, base and network (and kdepim). Something that happens |
| 73 |
even without gcc-updates. |
| 74 |
|
| 75 |
> Did you try to compile glib? No? Then I guess you've done no testing. |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
if he does not have glib? |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
> Or what kind of testing have you done? |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
enough for his system? |
| 82 |
|
| 83 |
> |
| 84 |
> > Since these are all heavy |
| 85 |
> > C++ users, I am sure that for my (pure ~x86) system, there are no |
| 86 |
> > issues. |
| 87 |
> |
| 88 |
> Congrats. It's not only me who's having problems. |
| 89 |
> |
| 90 |
|
| 91 |
no, you are not the only one, but you are one who makes a lot of fuss about |
| 92 |
problems, that are easy to solve and even happen without any gcc updates - |
| 93 |
and you should have learnt to deal with a long time ago. |
| 94 |
-- |
| 95 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives