From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48FA01392EF for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 19:30:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45B88E0867; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 19:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-f54.google.com (mail-oa0-f54.google.com [209.85.219.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60053E084C for ; Sun, 6 Jul 2014 19:30:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id eb12so3607266oac.41 for ; Sun, 06 Jul 2014 12:30:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=1trQOSOiFObXjDvAAw2wOoZjxsJx/Y5D1rf3r5TceWA=; b=sTTmiCSiVHphkalp32mbXES0Z/l5qr9EZQbWGFZS7U6k1dr0ivhiGHtHwAlo+cNlhs 8OCHyYPFvoFKNyEkjzFe4LNz4fLAP8GbSXnxYI7sxUHxQ6qW1t7gZCb6CdT5hus8RdVV wCm5PuSuJT6pkBH51sWM+2celS4+ve7HMwGujdPeggEN0X1gEjOU+u7y160GSqob9EUA xFTpOZNii+znRh2OqSEVpiCZD8yaPoUVsJZdjD3WkD2qTZtldIUI5dzA45kYl20EDfPt ZhjjRUBCKwYBe5TTyjd7jmsMGExrbdaXDfCfIdRzBeiJALAyZvBpPb+Rq3Jwkfb/Iq0L /Lzw== X-Received: by 10.182.22.111 with SMTP id c15mr26628630obf.32.1404675035422; Sun, 06 Jul 2014 12:30:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v7sm75714388obx.0.2014.07.06.12.30.33 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 06 Jul 2014 12:30:34 -0700 (PDT) Sender: William Hubbs Received: (nullmailer pid 27136 invoked by uid 1000); Sun, 06 Jul 2014 19:30:32 -0000 Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2014 14:30:32 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch Message-ID: <20140706193032.GA27048@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20140630040153.GA668@linux1> <20140630161555.15ab3403@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20140705210804.GA4133@kroah.com> <53B94A06.1070907@gentoo.org> 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53B94A06.1070907@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-Archives-Salt: c4b2fca9-231f-42bc-9357-fdf60fac2f64 X-Archives-Hash: 4bbc651b8e1c9c1735f96db1eba29750 --CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jul 06, 2014 at 01:07:18PM +0000, hasufell wrote: > If you are talking about actually testing and running the software then > that's a different story and definitely not within our scope when > committing to ~arch. >=20 > That said, I think it's a reasonable minimum to at least check if an > ebuild emerges on my current machine with my current setup before > committing to ~arch. If even that fails, what's the point of committing > the ebuild? Yes, this is basically what I do. I make sure the ebuild emerges and the software runs in the configuration I was running the old version in. Once I know that's true, I don't see anything wrong with committing to ~arch. William --CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlO5o9gACgkQblQW9DDEZTg0QgCfSGZAfcYZUsjQGNWlMMAz1syx fyEAoLmfauIyxeD/3xd+hEckTXii86dq =v7Dz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CE+1k2dSO48ffgeK--