From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N73ie-0007Xg-Ru for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:05:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5FD3CE09D1; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 09:05:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from amun.cheops.ods.org (amun.cheops.ods.org [82.95.138.191]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2557BE09D1 for ; Sun, 8 Nov 2009 09:05:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tefnut.cheops.ods.org ([2001:888:1022:0:211:24ff:fe37:e46e] helo=gentoo.org) by amun.cheops.ods.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N73ib-0004QC-Qj for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:05:54 +0100 Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:05:48 +0100 From: Fabian Groffen To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations Message-ID: <20091108090548.GG1150@gentoo.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20091103191005.18d98e2e@gentoo.org> <4AF1EBD8.4020502@gentoo.org> <20091104214823.64842abd@gentoo.org> <20091105091700.GA17478@eric.schwarzvogel.de> <4AF331B0.4020108@gentoo.org> <8b4c83ad0911060618r2b61c4b4w51238306b9c9a437@mail.gmail.com> <20091106144535.GT1150@gentoo.org> <4AF49E3E.30307@gentoo.org> <1257605665.8341.1314.camel@tablet> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1257605665.8341.1314.camel@tablet> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (Darwin 8.11.0, VIM - Vi IMproved 7.2) Organization: Gentoo Foundation, Inc. X-Content-Scanned: by amun.cheops.ods.org (Exim Exiscan) using SpamAssassin and ClamAV X-Archives-Salt: 1fc9eb3e-8695-4573-bb76-82e79c4d938e X-Archives-Hash: 1c044e7b2787b2262f239e074f21ff59 On 07-11-2009 17:54:25 +0300, Peter Volkov wrote: > > > Sounds like we could benefit from the "noarch" approach known in the RPM > > > world, such that all these packages can also be immediately keyworded > > > and stabilised for all arches. Would greatly simplify things for a > > > great deal of packages, maybe? > > > > We could introduce "noarch" and "~noarch" KEYWORDS, add "noarch" to > > the default ACCEPT_KEYWORDS setting for all profiles, and instruct > > unstable users to add "~noarch" to ACCEPT_KEYWORDS. > > Looks like this will not work for all noarch packages. Stardict > dictionary itself is noarch, but it RDEPENDS on stardict package which > is keyworded only on some archs. So we'll be forced either to keyword > stardict on all archs or we need to introduce some new way to work with > such situations. Would it be reasonable to just mask in such case? Resolution would eventually just hit the masked stardict dictionary and display the reason why it's masked (stardict doesn't compile, not yet looked into keywording: please try, etc.) -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level