| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Avuton Olrich
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 114
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:58 pm Post subject: Why packages that are clearly unstable are not masked. |
 |
|
This is not yet an "I hate gentoo" topic, I just don't understand why a package is causing X.org to crash is not masked. No one told me that a testing arch was supposed to be unstable. I don't mind testing, and the occasional instability, but once an instability is found why it is not squashed quickly is what I don't understand. I can even find instability in the 'stable' arch, and the Gentoo dev clearly ignores it, and doesn't mask it.
freetype with Gentoo patches will cause your X to crash
This bug was attached to a stable package for over 2 weeks
If it's happened twice to me, then I'm sure it has happened to others, maybe more often. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Aries-Belgium
l33t
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Posts: 730
Location: Willebroek, Belgium
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When packages are masked by keyword (~) they aren't stable yet and they could cause some problems in some cases. Look at the legend on packages.gentoo.org:
| Code: | Legend:
+ stable
~ testing
- not available
M+ stable / hard masked
M~ testing / hard masked |
Meaning that only packages with + in the table, are considered stable!
_________________
Ep2.nl | Developers Community |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Avuton Olrich
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aries-Belgium wrote: | When packages are masked by keyword (~) they aren't stable yet and they could cause some problems in some cases. Look at the legend on packages.gentoo.org:
| Code: | Legend:
+ stable
~ testing
- not available
M+ stable / hard masked
M~ testing / hard masked |
Meaning that only packages with + in the table, are considered stable! |
That's well understood, mdadm's example (see bug 73777) was marked stable for 2+ weeks, and segfaulted on use, but the Gentoo dev refused to mask it. And I also don't have a problem accepting the fact that I may hit the occasional corner case that I find an instability, since I'm running a testing arch, my problem is understanding why Gentoo devs aren't more proactive in masking unstable packages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aries-Belgium
l33t
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Posts: 730
Location: Willebroek, Belgium
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 21, 2006 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You're maybe right, but you also have to understand that the Gentoo devs can't take everything/everybody into count. If the majority of people don't have problems with the stable release of a package they aren't going to downgrade that fast. If some user is using the stable release and one day he does an world update and the package has been downgraded the package on his system will also be downgraded and maybe it causes problems on his computer. I think this is just a vicious circle ...
_________________
Ep2.nl | Developers Community |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
