> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Namens Thomas Bächler
> Verzonden: vrijdag 26 oktober 2007 13:50
> Aan: General Discusson about Arch Linux
> Onderwerp: Re: [arch] Unstable packages in extra?
> 
> 
> In case of gcc and glibc, we sometimes use snapshots that are not yet
> released, but Jan should answer the why and when questions here.

For glibc we used snapshots because back in the 2.3.x days, there were
rumours about glibc no longer being maintained as released versions, instead
of that, distributions should use certain CVS snapshots. This is what we did
for a while.
For binutils 2.17.xx.xx which were unstable versions, we switched to that
for three reasons:
- many other distributions did it already, even Debian Etch contains it
- GNU hashing which is supposed to be faster than sysV hashing
- AMD64 had problems with the recent stable glibc releases when using an
older binutils package

For gcc, our snapshots are mainly because of the gcj trunk branch we use for
java 5.0 support in gcj. With the release of 4.2.x there's not much need for
SVN snapshots anymore, as we take gcj snapshots from the ubuntu branch that
matches the gcc releases.

About rhythmbox being a development version: besides the bug in alsa-lib
that we triggered by updating rhythmbox, the program itself works fine.
Sure, there are some features that don't work 100% in the new version, but
those features didn't even exist in the old version. Apart from that, I've
been getting out of date flags two times per week for this package.

One other story is gnucash:
- did 1.6 stop working with recent system libraries?
- was goffice 0.5 a requirement for some other package?
Goffice 0.5 breaks both abiword-plugins (extra) and gnucash (community/AUR).
For the rest, I don't know any software besides the CVS version of gnucash
and the development version of gnumeric that requires goffice 0.5.


_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
arch@archlinux.org
http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch

Reply via email to