On Sat, 3 Sep 2005, Lina Pezzella wrote (in reply to Grobian):
> >The problem is happening for real at > >http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87758 > > > >there baselayout is necessary. However, baselayout is only pulled in > >the initial "emerge system" if you use ACCEPT_KEYWORD="~ppc-macos". > >Hence, I can't compile, because QTDIR is not set for me, while someone > >having a complete ~ppc-macos system can. Portage won't pull the > >dependency of baselayout for a reason I think, but the particular > >problem sheds this light on the whole problem of how to test what on > >which system. > > This is basically the basis of Hasan and my proposal to drop stable > support for ppc-macos. I think that if the amd team's methodology [1] had been employed, this problem would be less important. That is, "...chroots for core packages going from package.masked to testing..." Had the core packages been package.masked, qt would not have been keyworded ~ppc-macos. (One might take a broad definition of "core packages" to mean "a package that commonly serves as an implicit dep".) In general, it would then be safer for a stable end-user to do the occasional emerge from ~ppc-macos (an idea I like a lot), and it would mean that devs did not have to uniformly adopt ~ppc-macos (which is is not great for QA), and it would mean one less reason to drop the ppc-macos keyword (I'm trying criticise that proposal constructively, as I realise that its motivation is important.) -f [1] http://groups.google.com.au/group/linux.gentoo.dev/msg/7d984fa7593f8e80?hl=en&; -- [email protected] mailing list
