Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: nxserver-freenx-0.5.0 to be masked

[Stuart Herbert <stuart@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1553 bytes --]

On Sat, 2006-04-29 at 00:41 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Stuart Herbert wrote:
> What is the reason for the mask? Modular Xorg incompatibility in nx-x11?

Because it should not have been unmasked in the first place.  That was a
mistake on my part, to not notice that I hadn't masked it when I masked
everything else.

> I guess "testing" does not really count after two months in ~x86

It's an ebuild for an old snapshot of freenx.  We have better ebuilds in
the NX overlay, thanks to Jon Scruggs and everyone who's been
contributing via bugzilla.

Those ebuilds will be moved into Portage asap, just as soon as I've
caught up on my code reviewing.  The feedback from visitors to
#gentoo-nx has been very positive (although I believe printing remains
an issue atm).

> By the way masking something afterwards is bad habit because it will cause
> downgrades. Downgrades can be harmful because they can cause bugs to come
> up again that have been fixed in the latest version.

I'll time this so that the mask is added along with the latest ebuilds,
so that, although it will look like a downgrade, what users will get
will be much better.

Best regards,
Stu
-- 
Stuart Herbert                                         stuart@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer                                  http://www.gentoo.org/
                                          http://blog.stuartherbert.com/

GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319  C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
--


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]