| 1 |
On 8/5/19 3:21 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 09:59:06 -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> I see, I got caught (again) by the favorite gentoo sleight of hand of |
| 5 |
>> updating a package and not bumping its version. In my case, eudev. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I've not checked lately, but policy was that if an ebuild change did not |
| 8 |
> result in differences in the installed files, there was no need for a |
| 9 |
> version bump. This avoids needless recompiling of packages. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Realistically, almost all ebuild changes should incur a new revision. I |
| 13 |
would much rather recompile 100 packages *and have it work* than compile |
| 14 |
10 packages and have it crash three times requiring manual intervention |
| 15 |
because the tree is so screwed up. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
We have better guidelines these days: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
but they still give developers too much freedom to be lazy and commit |
| 22 |
important changes without a revision. The "straight to stable" advice |
| 23 |
contradicts our existing stabilization policy, and the USE flag advice |
| 24 |
says that you can rely on a non-default, portage-only feature to prevent |
| 25 |
breakage. |
Archives