From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ECz8K-0001m7-Ef for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:34:32 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j87CTmFe030842; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:29:48 GMT Received: from smtp05.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (smtp.nuvox.net [64.89.70.9]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j87CQeUU019266 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:26:41 GMT Received: from cgianelloni.nuvox.net (216.215.202.4.nw.nuvox.net [216.215.202.4]) by smtp05.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j87CVt1g016296 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 08:31:55 -0400 Received: by cgianelloni.nuvox.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 08:29:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tentative x86 arch team glep From: Chris Gianelloni To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20050907000321.744429e0@snowdrop.home> References: <20050904143711.GD23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <20050904210535.24ab8a39@snowdrop.home> <1125865598.11360.122.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050904205307.GG23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <1125869984.11364.143.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <20050906152209.GA9825@gentoo.org> <1126034976.10430.3.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <431DEF83.6070701@gentoo.org> <20050906204747.60753c4e@snowdrop.home> <1126041584.30327.42.camel@lycan.lan> <82e55463050906155176217954@mail.gmail.com> <20050907000321.744429e0@snowdrop.home> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-fho74IoL6HaEhDhwEwBr" Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 08:29:13 -0400 Message-Id: <1126096153.10712.11.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 X-Archives-Salt: cbf5e127-d444-452d-a9f0-403ce2925d6f X-Archives-Hash: 85c81d0732c8a799a7376e188fc3e668 --=-fho74IoL6HaEhDhwEwBr Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 00:03 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > a) Convenience. Testing. Some times we want to get user testing on a specific package or two, and it is easier to distribute it via the normal portage tree than not. Another reason for masking packages is for security reasons. This especially happens when there is no patch or fixed version upstream. It allows the user to decide if they wish to continue running a vulnerable package or not, without forcing the removal of the package from the tree. > b) Sadly, unlike some other distributions we don't refuse to package > things which won't work on all our tier one archs. This is both a pro and a con. There are many packages that we include that will *never* run on architectures but x86/amd64. These are mostly binary applications and games, but from the feedback that I have gotten, our users seem to enjoy that we have these packages in our tree. It is definitely a disadvantage when a source-based package does not work on all architectures, but with the volunteer team that we have, I think we do pretty well. The arch teams also do an excellent job of making sure things either work or don't on their architecture. The only way we could enforce source-based packages working on all of our tier-one architectures would be to have *much* larger arch teams. It would also slow down our productivity greatly. After all, if package foo doesn't work on sparc, they just don't have to keyword it. I find this requires much less manpower than forcing the package to either be removed, no matter how useful it is, or forcing the sparc team to come up with a patch so it can work on that architecture. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager Games - Developer Gentoo Linux --=-fho74IoL6HaEhDhwEwBr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDHt0ZkT4lNIS36YERAvK1AJ0SN2hE9C25iqKnzIW8+YtbF0yA9gCcCCES gn2Qmgj/vUW/doGB1OR0fOQ= =FIUF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-fho74IoL6HaEhDhwEwBr-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list