On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 16:20 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Tuesday 07 June 2005 16:04, Aron Griffis wrote: > > Could you explain why that policy needs to be dropped for alpha to be > > preferred? It's not obvious to me how that policy requires append. > You can't assume that maintainer arch would be x86, and with alphabetic > order, > you must ask to the maintainer which is his arch (and there's no way to learn > all them by heart). > Maybe we can add this to metadata?
You can't assume the maintainer's arch is x86 anyway, even if it is listed first. As a good example, my main box is an amd64. However, when I started with Gentoo, I only had an x86. This means all of my packages probably have x86 listed first. Do you think I actually changed them when I got an amd64? What about when I got my sparc? My ppc? Do I change them depending on which machine I'm using at the time? What about times when I am at work and can only test on x86, but not on any of the other architectures that I happen to own? Can you start to see where the idea of a maintainer arch really can be a PITA? While I would probably venture a guess that *most* of our packages are maintained by people with x86 machines, that isn't a guarantee. The simplest way to maintain the "maintainer arch" is to simply see which arch the maintainer changed the KEYWORDS on when he marked it stable. If none are stable, then don't mark it stable. If the maintainer marks it stable on one or many arches, then you can change KEYWORDS. Does that make sense? -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
