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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GJx9U-00014t-QW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2006 18:57:05 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k83IuNJs012644; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 18:56:23 GMT Received: from averell.tiscali.it (averell.tiscali.it [213.205.33.55]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k83IsR6f022534 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 18:54:27 GMT Received: from c1358217.kevquinn.com (84.222.86.2) by averell.tiscali.it (7.3.116) id 44EDBEEB000D9ECC for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 20:54:27 +0200 Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 20:54:30 +0200 From: "Kevin F. Quinn" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 2006.1 Message-ID: <20060903205430.493438e2@c1358217.kevquinn.com> In-Reply-To: References: <44F95E3E.9000708@gentoo.org> <44F96559.6010003@gentoo.org> <44F96881.90806@gentoo.org> <44F98E43.5040307@gentoo.org> <44FA15D1.2020209@gentoo.org> <44FAE883.8090107@gentoo.org> <8a0028260609030742q3e908e3du9cd25caab0379753@mail.gmail.com> <44FAECE8.5060309@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.4.0 (GTK+ 2.8.19; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Sig_ydMz16+D0Vo6JI_9UrHGfrs; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: e182e6eb-a307-4b45-a918-9121f68313ff X-Archives-Hash: 5600e41a977a8e25abd0d3fc1bc33ba9 --Sig_ydMz16+D0Vo6JI_9UrHGfrs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 3 Sep 2006 17:44:32 +0100 "Stuart Herbert" wrote: > On 9/3/06, Alec Warner wrote: > > Because the thought that stable is always "stable" or that because > > we released things are "stable" is incorrect ;) >=20 > You're not supposed to break the stable tree; that surely must include > stabilising a compiler (which is the _default_ for new installs) that > can't compile all the packages marked stable for your arch. That's just not feasible, as we've identified before. You can't expect sys-devel/gcc to take responsibility for every package in the tree in all configurations. --=20 Kevin F. Quinn --Sig_ydMz16+D0Vo6JI_9UrHGfrs Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE+yTm9G2S8dekcG0RApNuAKDeO64YGtvh1+PImkhUyCnAk43ZCACgoLl6 yAyWZtvrPKlTmWAJjg2M+qY= =m7kT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_ydMz16+D0Vo6JI_9UrHGfrs-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list