Hi Spider, On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 06:52:15 +0200 Spider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> begin quote > On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:25:30 +1000 > Jonathan Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > just wanted to clarify my understanding of x86 and ~x86. I sort of > > assumed x86 mean stable and I assumed that meant that the "software" > > was stable, or does it just refer the fact that the ebuild is stable > > and working and won't break your system, but all bets are off as to > > whether the software is actually stable. > > Consider it like this, ~x86 isn't -unstable- its -testing-. It's not > the place where we stuff your latest alpha release software, this > "really nifty" (tm) 3 version alpha that is certified as a "Really Cool > Thing" for the future. It's where we put "stable" software with > untested (in major regards) ebuilds to check for both ebuild > inconsistencies (Sometimes they do happen, people miss dependencies and > so on) or conflics (Oh, Just in, foo-1.2.4-r2 breaks library > compability with seldom-used-1.0.22.ebuild. oops.) > So is "stable" what the gentoo devs consider stable, or what the software package developers consider stable. I point to gimp-print-4.3.18 which is a development version (4.2.something is the current stable) . I know this isn't really a critical thing in this instance (though I wouldn't like my printing to stop working), it's just I'm starting to try and take back control of what goes onto my systems. I think "gentoo is great" (tm) but it's a bit of a moving target and becomes "Ahem, not so great" (tm) when something breaks and I spend a day (or more) trying to find out what broke. Cheers. Jonathan. > So its the other way around :-) > > the software is (supposedly) ready to go into stable, but the build is > in testing . > > > //Spider > > > > -- > begin .signature > This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature! > See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. > end > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
