On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 01:33:27AM +0200, Branko Badrljica wrote: > 1. Much of the time on Gentoo using of ~ packages is not user explicit > choice but forced compromise. > I don't remember exactly anymore what prompted me to enter openrc in > package.keywords, but I surely remember having a few headaches with it. > Same is with many other packages- many times using ~arch is the only > answer, so 99% of the time it is used for getting some package to work > and not for pure testing.
The ~arch tree is where things go when they first enter the tree, and, if there are no issues with them for a period of time they are marked stable. Hard masking, on the other hand, generally is for packages that are known to break many systems. The developer tested the package and had others test it and it worked for them, so he committed it to the ~arch tree, which was the correct thing for him to do. > Having in mind state of the matter in_real_world, I really don't think > that having such things at least temporarily masked ( not to mention > DOCUMENTED!) is really not overdoing it. Technically, there is nothing to document except possibly warning against changing the oldnet use flag. But, again, if you are using ~arch packages you should know how to recover. The openrc guide is at http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/openrc-migration.xml, and it still documents the correct way to upgrade to openrc if you did not switch to the new network scripts. > As it was done, it presented me with nasty surprise. Machine has gotten > through upgrade world just fine and only after reboot it couldn't start > network interfaces. Manual restart croaked with some error about python > not being able to find some function. That doesn't sound like an openrc issue; openrc does not have anything to do with python as far as I know. I would be curious what other packages were involved in the update? What did you do to get the system up and running again? > It felt exactly like a few last times when my ext4 decided to lose a few > hundred essential system files. There was nothing to suggest openrc. > After I lost some time reemerging system files and sifting through > ebuilds, packages and scripts, that casual message here about new openrc > hit me purely by chance, otherwise I would be in for much more pain. > After I got system running again, I couldn't find anywhere anything at > all about any substantial change in openrc. > Not on bugzilla, not on openrc home page nor anywhere else. That's because there wasn't one, and because ~arch is not considered stable anyway. ~arch is where things go so that we can get them tested, after we test them ourselves, before they move to stable. And, as was said above, if you are running ~arch and things break, you are expected to know how to recover. When you file the bug, please give us all of the details about what you did, what was upgraded, the exact error message you got, etc. -- William Hubbs gentoo accessibility team lead willi...@gentoo.org
pgpyWbVOHzY48.pgp
Description: PGP signature
