On Friday 14 December 2012 02:49:08 George Shapovalov wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2012 12:59:40 Jory A. Pratt wrote:
But to keep ebuilds for ex. gcc around for over 5 years is just insane.
I would argue, that stuff like gcc and some other system packages should be
kept forewer. One
On Thursday 13 December 2012 13:59:40 Jory A. Pratt wrote:
Well there are exceptions to every rule, it is the ideal to get a
discussion to make a better decision as to when a revision of a package
should be removed and no longer supported. Well many slots can be useful
for many packages, there
On Wednesday 19 December 2012 18:56:10 Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Friday 14 December 2012 02:49:08 George Shapovalov wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2012 12:59:40 Jory A. Pratt wrote:
But to keep ebuilds for ex. gcc around for over 5 years is just insane.
I would argue, that stuff like gcc
On 14 December 2012 06:21, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
chith...@gentoo.org wrote:
William Hubbs schrieb:
For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I think that if we are going
to keep things this old in the tree we need a good reason for
them.
iirc, gcc-2.95 and linux-2.4 (still used for some
On 14 December 2012 07:56, George Shapovalov geo...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thursday 13 December 2012 21:25:59 Markos Chandras wrote:
We also have 720 packages listed as maintainer-needed[1] meaning
nobody is actually taking care of them.
And this number is pretty scary.
Scary how?
With over
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 13/12/12 10:51 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:06:34PM -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256
On 13/12/12 06:49 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I
On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 21:25:59 +
Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
We also have 720 packages listed as maintainer-needed[1] meaning
nobody is actually taking care of them.
And this number is pretty scary.
[1]http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/treecleaners/maintainer-needed.xml
Why
WH == William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org writes:
WH For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I think that if we are going to
WH keep things this old in the tree we need a good reason for them.
gcc-2.95 is still the current version for some non-mainstream dist+
architecture tuples. The ability to
El jue, 13-12-2012 a las 21:51 -0600, William Hubbs escribió:
[...]
I'm wondering if packages assigned to maintainer-needed should be
looked at and removed since no one cares about them after they have
sat there for a certain amount of time?
They are, aren't they? treecleaners has
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As many of us are aware the tree is growing to a size that is really
unacceptable for many. We have many packages that have excessive amounts
of versions laying around that are not used any more. Many of these
packages with excessive revisions most
El jue, 13-12-2012 a las 12:31 -0600, Jory A. Pratt escribió:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
As many of us are aware the tree is growing to a size that is really
unacceptable for many. We have many packages that have excessive amounts
of versions laying around that are not
2012/12/13 Jory A. Pratt anar...@gentoo.org:
As many of us are aware the tree is growing to a size that is really
unacceptable for many. We have many packages that have excessive amounts
of versions laying around that are not used any more. Many of these
packages with excessive revisions most
2012/12/13 Tomáš Chvátal tomas.chva...@gmail.com:
But there is one big ass but. We have some packages that were
stabilised last time few year back and they provide multiple testing
versions on top of that.
Who is the one to deterimine which one should go stable and which to get rid
of?
We
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2012 12:48 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
But there is one big ass but. We have some packages that were
stabilised last time few year back and they provide multiple testing
versions on top of that.
Who is the one to deterimine which one
I think another good reason for treecleaning a package is if upstream for
the package stops supporting their package and recommends that you use
a new package. In this situation, once the new package hits stable,
there is really not a reason to keep the old package around. Instead,
any necessary
El jue, 13-12-2012 a las 13:10 -0600, William Hubbs escribió:
I think another good reason for treecleaning a package is if upstream for
the package stops supporting their package and recommends that you use
a new package. In this situation, once the new package hits stable,
there is really not
On 13 December 2012 19:28, Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote:
El jue, 13-12-2012 a las 13:10 -0600, William Hubbs escribió:
I think another good reason for treecleaning a package is if upstream for
the package stops supporting their package and recommends that you use
a new package. In this
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Jory A. Pratt anar...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2012 12:48 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
But there is one big ass but. We have some packages that were
stabilised last time few year back and they provide multiple
On 13 December 2012 17:57, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Jory A. Pratt anar...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2012 12:48 PM, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
But there is one big ass but. We have some packages that
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 06:24:30PM -0500, Jeff Horelick wrote:
On 13 December 2012 17:57, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Jory A. Pratt anar...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/13/2012 12:48 PM, Tomáš Chvátal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 13/12/12 06:24 PM, Jeff Horelick wrote:
On 13 December 2012 17:57, Mike Gilbert flop...@gentoo.org
wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Jory A. Pratt
anar...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
On
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 13/12/12 06:49 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I think that if we are going
to keep things this old in the tree we need a good reason for
them.
iirc, gcc-2.95 and linux-2.4 (still used for some embedded systems)
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
+1 , the ability to install older versions of software or legacy
software is one of the reasons I switched to Gentoo in the first
place. There is of course a point when these packages can no longer
be maintained, but
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:06:34PM -0500, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 13/12/12 06:49 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I think that if we are going
to keep things this old in the tree we need a good reason for
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 05:57:16PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
I am sure that some people find it very handy to have old gcc ebuilds
around. It might come in handy for testing.
Testhing what?
It doesn't matter if they can't compile the latest kernel. If someone
files a bug for that, it gets
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 12:07 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 05:57:16PM -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote:
I am sure that some people find it very handy to have old gcc ebuilds
around. It might come in handy for testing.
Testhing what?
Maybe to see if my code
William Hubbs schrieb:
For example, glibc-2.9 and gcc-2.95. I think that if we are going
to keep things this old in the tree we need a good reason for
them.
iirc, gcc-2.95 and linux-2.4 (still used for some embedded systems)
play best together.
I'm not sure how strong this argument is
On Thursday 13 December 2012 12:59:40 Jory A. Pratt wrote:
But to keep ebuilds for ex. gcc around for over 5 years is just insane.
What?
I would argue, that stuff like gcc and some other system packages should be
kept forewer. One (working) version per SLOT is enough, but these should just
On Thursday 13 December 2012 21:25:59 Markos Chandras wrote:
We also have 720 packages listed as maintainer-needed[1] meaning
nobody is actually taking care of them.
And this number is pretty scary.
Scary how?
With over 15000 packages total by now (in only the official tree; or even
more, what
29 matches
Mail list logo
