On Saturday 18 April 2015 11:15:56 hasufell wrote: > On 04/17/2015 07:15 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Alexander Berntsen > > > > <berna...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> On 17/04/15 16:33, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > >>> The problem is double effort: previously one developer effort was > >>> needed, now effort is doubled at least > >> > >> You have correctly identified the problem; in order to do things > >> properly one must do things properly, which is more difficult than not > >> doing things properly. > > > > "Properly" is just a matter of requirements. Gentoo has 18k packages > > right now. In my general experience, they install fine maybe 95% of > > the time. > > Can you back up your "general experience" with a tinderbox log? In > addition, you are decreasing "QA" to "compiles". That's not the definition. >
Out of all the packages that are visible (i.e. not masked, hidden by uninstallable dependencies, or hidden by useflag requiremenst) For amd64 I see a build failure rate of ~2%, iow. out of ~10k packages that are buildable with a standard profile about 200 fail. (Last run done about half a year ago, it's slowly improved since I started in 2006) So the 95% buildable sounds like a very pessimistic estimate to me. For x86 the data looks pretty much the same, I think marginally worse.
