Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Darren Kirby <bulliver@×××××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: how thorough is #emerge --sync?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 18:26:25
Message-Id: 200610181123.55482.bulliver@badcomputer.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: how thorough is #emerge --sync? by Neil Bothwick
1 Quoth the Neil Bothwick
2 > On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 22:53:27 -0700, Darren Kirby wrote:
3 > > > 0.8 is the latest stable version. Why do you think, that a different
4 > > > version should be offered, when you "emerge dir2ogg"?
5 > >
6 > > Well, I'm the upstream author, and _I_ think there should be different
7 > > (ie: newer) version offered. Good enough?
8 >
9 > Sort of. Their is a newer version available in portage, but the ebuild has
10 > not been marked stable yet. however, the latest stable is 0.9.2 and I see
11 > you released 0.9.3 in July, so the ebuilds are definitely lagging behind.
12 >
13 > When the package has not changed in terms of build process and
14 > dependencies, you can normally make a copy of the ebuild with the new
15 > version number, digest it and then emerge it. As the author and a Gentoo
16 > user, why not make an ebuild available on your web page and post it too
17 > Bugzilla, then the package maintainer may pick it up and put it in portage
18
19 I did! Back on September 12th: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=147360
20
21 I don't know if it is overworked devs, lost in the shuffle, or what, but I've
22 done all I can. I am not going to harass the devs about it...
23
24 -d
25 --
26 darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
27 "...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
28 - Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972
29 --
30 gentoo-user@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-user] Re: Re: how thorough is #emerge --sync? Alexander Skwar <listen@×××××××××××××××.name>