| 1 |
Saturday 27 May 2006 19:58 skrev Alexander Skwar: |
| 2 |
> >> gcc update "Nothing needs to be done".... Sure... How much did the |
| 3 |
> >> person who wrote this check? "Hello World!" worked, and that's it? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
What exactly do you intend to achieve by flaming the devs? |
| 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 |
Well, you chose to be on the cutting edge. You chose to upgrade as soon as it |
| 15 |
was unmasked. If you really think there is a complete lack of QA then why the |
| 16 |
hell didn't you wait a week to see if it was true? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> That's wrong - as it has been confirmed and corrected now. If that |
| 19 |
> warning would have been there in the gcc-upgrade doc, everything |
| 20 |
> would have been fine. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> > ~arch works most of the |
| 23 |
> > time, but it is a _testing_ branch. Do you expect the devs to login |
| 24 |
> > to each and every Gentoo user's system to test a new package and |
| 25 |
> > ensure complete functionality before adding it to ~arch? |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Bullshit. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
That's not bullshit. Occasional breakage is the risk when living on the |
| 30 |
cutting edge. This is the purpose of the testing branch. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> I'd expect them to do testing and not give so bold statements |
| 33 |
> as "The upgrade should be incredibly easy and require no additional |
| 34 |
> work to install and use. " without making VERY sure, that this |
| 35 |
> is actually true. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Granted - there's only so much that can be done. And also |
| 38 |
> granted, that's ~arch. But that statement is just so irritating. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Well, the devs are unpaid volunteers and human beings. They do make mistakes |
| 41 |
sometimes but I'm quite convinced that their intensions are good. Get over |
| 42 |
it. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> And what's also irritating are so many small errors, like files |
| 45 |
> with non-matching filesizes/checksums in the digests. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
This has got nothing to do with the gcc upgrade. It has to do with the fact |
| 48 |
that ebuilds are occasionally updated with no change of revision. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
> > I just upgraded to gcc-4.1 and pruned 3.4.6, and KDE, koffice, OOo, |
| 51 |
> > and mozilla all still load and run fine. |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> Did you yet re-compile Qt 3 and Qt 4? No? |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
I just did (only qt 3.3.6-r1 - I don't have qt 4). And guess what. KDE |
| 56 |
(kontact, kmail, knode, akregator, konqueror, ...) still works on my system. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
So now I'm recompiling everything that has the kdehiddenvisibility use flag |
| 59 |
with that enabled.. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
But did you not see the einfo from postinst in qt-3*? |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
> INFO: postinst |
| 64 |
> After a rebuild of Qt, it can happen that Qt plugins (such as Qt/KDE styles, |
| 65 |
> or widgets for the Qt designer) are no longer recognized. If this situation |
| 66 |
> occurs you should recompile the packages providing these plugins, and you |
| 67 |
> should also make sure that Qt and its plugins were compiled with the same |
| 68 |
> version of gcc. Packages that may need to be rebuilt are, for instance, |
| 69 |
> kde-base/kdelibs, kde-base/kdeartwork and kde-base/kdeartwork-styles. |
| 70 |
> See http://doc.trolltech.com/3.3/plugins-howto.html for more infos. |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
Note that it says rebuild and not upgrade. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
[SNIP] |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
-- |
| 77 |
Bo Andresen |
Archives