| 1 |
On Sep 30, 2011 1:10 AM, "Michael Mol" <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alan Mackenzie <acm@×××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Hi, Gentoo! |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Why are there so many packages whose versions never become stable? By |
| 7 |
> > "many", I mean here at least two. :-) |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > These are the kernel and Firefox. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > My kernel is currently 2.6.39-gentoo-r3, built on July 18. By examining |
| 12 |
> > ebuilds, I now see that the ~amd64 is already up to 3.0.4-r1. I've |
| 13 |
> > missed 3.0.[0-3], it seems. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> The 2.6.x has stabilized versions. 3.x has been kept masked, because |
| 16 |
> even though it isn't significantly different from the latest 2.6.x, a |
| 17 |
> lot of tools were shown to fall apart when they see 3.x.y rather than |
| 18 |
> 2.6.x. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Several days ago I did raise my concern on this behavior when I noticed that |
| 22 |
emerge wants to downgrade my hardened-sources. Although I'm using ~amd64, I |
| 23 |
draw the line on 3.0 and specified ~2.6.39. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Now I'm forced to maintain a private/personal overlay to ensure that the |
| 26 |
kernels of my boxen don't get downgraded. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I'll reconsider my stance in November; hopefully by that time essential |
| 29 |
packages will no longer fall apart when encountering 3.x.y. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Rgds, |
Archives